How far do they recommend revising estimates? .... drum roll .... by half.
To put things in perspective:
- Right now, due to the ice melting, oceans are rising at the rate of 0.2 inch/year
- Revising the ice loss by half, would mean the oceans are rising at the rate of 0.1 inch/year
It is said that this 0.2 inch compares "dramatically" with 0.07 inch/year ocean rise in the 1960s. I guess if the true figure is closer to 0.1 inch (as suggested by the article, unless I'm misreading it, which is very possible due to my rose-colored glasses), that compares to the 0.07 inch back in the 60s. (There cannot possibly be any statistical difference between 0.1 inch and 0.07 inch when talking about the rise in ocean levels, can there?)
Incidentally, much of this has to do with glacial weight, which I don't understand, but I do understand the statement in the linked article that says the glaciers began "to retreat" (that would be shrink in size) 20,000 years ago. Isn't that when man started using oil for mass transportation?
I can't make this stuff up.
Oh, one last thing. The writer uses the adjective "dramatically" in comparing the effect of the 0.2 inch ocean rise with 0.07 inch rise. I wonder what adjective would be used if he were to ask what effect a meteor, the size that wiped out the dinosaurs, hitting the earth would have on us in 2010? Just asking. [I made that comment as a throwaway; now today, I see that there is a report that two asteroids "buzzed" earth in the past 24 hours. I gotta go buy some lottery tickets.]
I can't resist. I think in science class today, I will have the students take a 12 oz glass of water and add enough water to make the water rise 0.07 inch; and then take another 12 oz glass of water and have them add enough to make the water rise 0.2 inch, and then see if they can tell the difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.