Inhabited Island Vanishes

[Dubh Aingeal]

For the first time the rising ocean levels have washed away an inhabited island. Lohachara island was at one point home to some 10,000 people. It, along with several other spits of land near the Indian mainland, is now permanently underwater.

From the article:

As the seas continue to swell, they will swallow whole island nations, from the Maldives to the Marshall Islands, inundate vast areas of countries from Bangladesh to Egypt, and submerge parts of scores of coastal cities. Eight years ago ... the first uninhabited islands - in the Pacific atoll nation of Kiribati - vanished beneath the waves. The people of low-lying islands in Vanuatu, also in the Pacific, have been evacuated as a precaution, but the land still juts above the sea. The disappearance of Lohachara, once home to 10,000 people, is unprecedented.

[Fierce Critter]

Fucking conservative republican Christians. They've done it again.

And that was TOTALLY a joke.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

That Island sunk 20 years ago. It's in a major river delta.... maybe it just got washed away by natural erosion. BTW.. the sea has only risen 3.14mm

[Hellion]

Wait till the Polar caps melt alot more.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

It will be a long wait. Polar ice froms from the bottom up. As it does.. the tops break off. We hear alot about how the caps are "melting" because the tops are breaking off... if you read a great deal of stuff you'll come across the part that the mainstream media omits.. that new ice is forming of on the bottom at normal rates.

[Hellion]

It will be a long wait. Polar ice froms from the bottom up. As it does.. the tops break off. We hear alot about how the caps are "melting" because the tops are breaking off... if you read a great deal of stuff you'll come across the part that the mainstream media omits.. that new ice is forming of on the bottom at normal rates.

Cool thanx for the good info,I'll have to check that out

[n0Mad]

It will be a long wait. Polar ice froms from the bottom up. As it does.. the tops break off. We hear alot about how the caps are "melting" because the tops are breaking off... if you read a great deal of stuff you'll come across the part that the mainstream media omits.. that new ice is forming of on the bottom at normal rates.

Yay! Somebody that does homework! I advise everybody to watch Penn & Teller's show on Showtime, "Bullshit!". I have seasons 1-3 on DVD. It's not unbiased by any means and somethings I disagree with, but they really do their homework and show how a lot of what people panic about is really just a bunch of bullshit.

[ZhukovCodeslinger]

I remember reading that there were a few new islands formed recently... and they were found by following the pumice floats back to where the new islands broke the surface.

[torn asunder]

It will be a long wait. Polar ice froms from the bottom up. As it does.. the tops break off. We hear alot about how the caps are "melting" because the tops are breaking off... if you read a great deal of stuff you'll come across the part that the mainstream media omits.. that new ice is forming of on the bottom at normal rates.

not to be too argumentative, but from everything i've seen and read, ice forms from the top for the simple reason that ice floats... i found this link about sea ice and skimmed thru it, and i don't see a thing about ice growing from the bottom. (admittedly, tho, i haven't fully read it - just skimmed)

[torn asunder]

i just realized - maybe you meant that the ice forms on the bottom of the surface ice, thus pushing up on the icepack due to bouyancy!? (i think that was part of that article...)

[BrassFusion]

It wouldn't make much sense for most of the ice to form at the top, cuz all the water's around the bottom... and at the water level, the water moves so much it might be slower to form ice.

It would take real real cold temperatures at the bottom to freeze saltwater though, so maybe ice WOULD form at the top from precipitation that freezes. Damn. I'm just no help. If I could analyze a chunk of ice off an iceberg to determine salt content, I could tell you... X)~

**later**

I read that article. It sucked, buddy-o. Not that the information was bad (I'm certainly less knowledgeable about the subject than the guy who wrote the essay), but it was SO poorly written. The gist of it was that if present trends continue, the ice will all melt. It looked like he tried to make it seem really smart and well-researched and unbiased so he could barely insinuate a liberal agenda- and you'll hardly EVER hear me say that. While the information might be true, it's so poorly organized I'd rather not trust it as a source. Ugh.

[maeve]

If I remember correctly the problem with the melting ice caps, isn't that more ice is failing to replace it fast enough, so much as, as ice freezes the salt remains at the bottom, which means that an excelerated melt off of the caps allows too much fresh water into the mix of sea water, it also allows for more ocean surface exposure, which in turn allows for greater amounts of precipitation, more fresh water. This is what may cause the great conveyor belt to shut down. The belt is what keeps Europe, Lower Canada, and the Upper US from freezing over. The belt maintains the flow of ocean water and fresh water which keeps our climates as we know them to be. A shut down of the belt will launch us into another ice age. Of course this has been happening on a regular basis ever since, well, before when. Ice ages are a natural part of the earth's regeneration process. The problem here is that we now have massive amounts of people who would be displaced and growing food becomes very problematic as well (hard to grow veggies in the snow and ice). I believe the center of disagreement within the cirlce of science, is how much of this is man responsible for, and how quickly will it happen. It is most certainly not a question of "IF" it will happen, but rather, how soon. Here's an article from NASA that probably explains the process of the belt better than I can:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/05mar_arctic.htm

[Marblez]

If I remember correctly the problem with the melting ice caps, isn't that more ice is failing to replace it fast enough, so much as, as ice freezes the salt remains at the bottom, which means that an excelerated melt off of the caps allows too much fresh water into the mix of sea water, it also allows for more ocean surface exposure, which in turn allows for greater amounts of precipitation, more fresh water. This is what may cause the great conveyor belt to shut down. The belt is what keeps Europe, Lower Canada, and the Upper US from freezing over. The belt maintains the flow of ocean water and fresh water which keeps our climates as we know them to be. A shut down of the belt will launch us into another ice age. Of course this has been happening on a regular basis ever since, well, before when. Ice ages are a natural part of the earth's regeneration process. The problem here is that we now have massive amounts of people who would be displaced and growing food becomes very problematic as well (hard to grow veggies in the snow and ice). I believe the center of disagreement within the cirlce of science, is how much of this is man responsible for, and how quickly will it happen. It is most certainly not a question of "IF" it will happen, but rather, how soon. Here's an article from NASA that probably explains the process of the belt better than I can:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/05mar_arctic.htm

Although I do not doubt the validity of this article. I find it highly interesting that THE ONLY sentence left out in the streaming audio was "Others doubt it will happen at all."