Jump to content

Antarctic ice sheet may melt in 7,000 years


blike

Recommended Posts

story.antarctica.jpg
CNN has an article on a new study that claims the Antarctic ice sheet may be gone in 7,000 years. Interestingly, the study notes the sheet began melting about 10,000 years ago and is still shrinking.

 

"Stone said the study cannot prove or disprove any affect on the melting by global warming, a gradual increase in temperatures that some believe is accelerated by the burning of fossil fuels. Instead, he said, the researchers have measured what is apparently a natural cycle of ice buildup and melting that may have been going on periodically for millions of years. "

 

If the sheet does completely melt, global sea levels could rise 16 feet, drowning islands and coasts.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well i dont give the world 20 more years to live anyway.

 

I think that we will overpopulate from cloning, and have nuclear warfare, also our environment will be destroyed, and we will just die out...

 

I dont give us 20 more years. We're living at the end of times.

 

So the ice sheet is probably going to be nuked sometime in the future anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Soulja

Well i dont give the world 20 more years to live anyway.

 

I think that we will overpopulate from cloning, and have nuclear warfare, also our environment will be destroyed, and we will just die out...

 

I dont give us 20 more years. We're living at the end of times.

 

So the ice sheet is probably going to be nuked sometime in the future anyway.

I give us about 60 years tops.

 

40 years of The Resource Wars will take everybody's mind off the end of civilisation though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah i guess 60 is more probable.

 

Well one thing's for sure, in 30 years we run out of Tungsten so were not gonna have lightbulbs.

 

Plus i just KNOW theres gonna be a nuclear war, its inevitable. You cant just have tons of weapons so you can "not use them".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt we have enough nuclear weapons to do as much damage as most people predict "full blown nuclear war" would cause.

 

In fact, if there was a nuclear war most missile would not even get in the air.

 

 

There are far easier and quieter ways to kill a city than with a nuke, it's just that nobody wants to go down in history as the most evil bastard who ever lived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iraq/North Korea don't actually have nukes, so the extent of a nuclear war would be us bombing a few of their cities if they used bio/chem weapons. However, if all rational war conventions failed and we deployed our entire nuclear arsenal, we could easily end all life on the surface of the earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by fafalone

Iraq/North Korea don't actually have nukes, so the extent of a nuclear war would be us bombing a few of their cities if they used bio/chem weapons. However, if all rational war conventions failed and we deployed our entire nuclear arsenal, we could easily end all life on the surface of the earth.

 

I know they dont have nukes (at least Iraq)

 

But all the countries with nukes, you just cant have them sitting there all the time. At one point they will be used, its inevitable. And once 1 person shoots the first weapon, then every country will be firing at each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.