Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 406 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters (30 Days)
Topic Options
#24449 - 01/11/08 02:22 AM Glacier Woes Overstated?
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
New research from the University of California - San Diego

You know , I ( personaly ) wouldnt believe a thing that a university in california , especially southern california , to be more precise san diego state university , have to say !!

So they can do research in san diego , research that tends to calm worries about global warming...

I wonder if they spent any government funding on this research?

because when I applied for a grant to san diego state university PIER program for the CFPFM.
( Centrifugal Force Pressurized Fluid Multiplier )
a device that used pressurized fluids to generate larger volumes
of the same or higher pressure fluids.

of which the excess pressurized fluids could have been used to turn a hydraulic motor and generate electricity.

in which the proceeds from the grant was to be used by Georgia Tech to validate the concept , the san diego state university was unable to do its own screening of this particular application.

and the application was sent to a outside engineering firm for approval recomendations.

Several professors and doctors at GA Tech had wanted to research this concept as a summer project at GA Tech , they were obviously interested enought to want it to be a summer project.
wouldnt you think?

anyway as I figured the engineering firm returned the application with the reason for not recommending.

and the reason was that in the application they found a mathmetical error.

I used kg-f

they used kg-f/sec

I believe...

Although the entire formula and its result should have led them to understand that the type-0 was a type-0 and that the overall math that accompanied the application was not the basis of the application.

anyway...after their recommendation , the PIER program refused to allow me to correct the mathmetical error and stated that I could never apply to the PIER program again with this particular concept.

So I hope they are enjoying their GOOD weather they are having now , and the even BETTER weather to come...LOL

thought I would add this...

a year or two later I watched a documentary about de-salination
there was a short in the documentary about a amazing new pump that used the residual water pressure from the water that was comming out of the pump to boost the water pressure going into the pump by

((( rotating the water ))).

thus increasing the water pressure going into the pump and relieving the pump of the need to pressurize the water as much.

thereby reducing the amount of energy required to run the pumps
and allowing for salt water to be de-salinized at a much more affordable cost.


so what they did was they used pressurized water and they increased the waters pressure even further by rotating the water using the lower pressure water.

sounds so familiar to me...LOL

funny that the amazing new pressure booster device was implemented in california salt water de-salinization plants.

But the same exact principle that was used in this amazing device was the basis of the CFPFM...

but the CFPFM was not worth the 70,000.00 for the grant of which I would have been forced to accept 5,000 for filling the application.

I tried to refuse the 5,000 but was told that it was mandantory.

I've always heard that california leads the way.

I guess its their choice as to which way the rest of us go.

Great Leading california...


Edited by paul (01/11/08 03:12 AM)
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
.
#24452 - 01/11/08 02:50 AM Re: Glacier Woes Overstated? [Re: paul]
Mike Kremer Offline

Megastar

Registered: 10/16/04
Posts: 1696
Loc: London UK
Originally Posted By: paul
New research from the University of California - San Diego

You know , I ( personaly ) wouldnt believe a thing that a university in california , especially southern california , to be more precise san diego state university , have to say !!
..........................................................................................................>
So I hope they are enjoying their GOOD weather they are having now , and the even BETTER weather to come...LOL


[quote=Mike Kremer]

Prehaps its nothing to worry about since the URL states:-

The study found strong evidence that an ice sheet about 50-60 percent the size of the modern Antarctic ice cap existed for about 200,000 years.

So, if our present Ice sheets shrink by half, going by past events , we neednt worry too much.

Even Planet Mars has a huge ice sheet

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap981216.html

But now they have discovered that a couple of tidal marks have shown that the sea is actually getting lower in these two
places.....due to the land rising from loss of glacial ice weight.
I will soon be all change....and recompile using the latest data


_________________________
.

.
"You will never find a real Human being - Even in a mirror." ....Mike Kremer.



Top
#24454 - 01/11/08 03:52 AM Re: Glacier Woes Overstated? [Re: Mike Kremer]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Mike:

the ground is rising because of the melting ice.

from the satelight images of the arctic sea ice concentrations and the snow concentrations, it makes me wonder/certain if there will be a flash over at the arctic.

what is really uncomfortable is the thought of our upcomming weather patterns if a ice flash over occurs this winter or next winter.

its nice knowing that the yellowstone national caldera ground is cooling now , because that coolness goes a long way down, however the melting ice that is atop ground is now causing the magma to push up the land masses.

this may cause california to loose the valley.
if the plate shifts too much.

that would be a terible thing as the water would rush in and the people would not be able to withstand the onslaught of water.

I suppose that any warnings that we could expect if any would be that of ground rises around iceland and greenland and the appearance of a sea level increase in further away places.

a particular place to look for warnings would be the bearing straights to see if there is a increasing volume of water passing through the straights that cannot be accounted for by the melting ice above the ground and the forming sea ice.
HERE




Edited by paul (01/11/08 03:58 AM)
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#24581 - 01/17/08 07:01 PM Re: Glacier Woes Overstated? [Re: paul]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Mike

Quote:
But now they have discovered that a couple of tidal marks have shown that the sea is actually getting lower in these two
places.....due to the land rising from loss of glacial ice weight.


Where are the two places , you mentioned?

thanks
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#24588 - 01/18/08 01:23 AM Re: Glacier Woes Overstated? [Re: paul]
Mike Kremer Offline

Megastar

Registered: 10/16/04
Posts: 1696
Loc: London UK
Originally Posted By: paul
Mike

Quote:
But now they have discovered that a couple of tidal marks have shown that the sea is actually getting lower in these two
places.....due to the land rising from loss of glacial ice weight.


Where are the two places , you mentioned? thanks


[quote=Mike Kremer] 2 Paul

Hi Paul here is the Data I produced some time ago to prove that the Average Sea Levels had risen slightly over the last 50 years.

This Data is the result of thousands of real people noting the tidal heights on Jettys and Harbour Walls, all over the World.

I have no individual heights saved. But if you look at Artic port tidal heights at say:- Greenland, Iceland, Norway? etc
You should find what you are looking for.
Remember that Digital Satellite/Radar Sea Height data has NOT been around for 50 years.

Also Note that I dug out this Data to prove that the average Sea height had been rising for the past 50 years, only. So use with care.
-SINCE YOU ARE LOOKING FOR SEA FALLS, PROBABLY DUE TO GLACIER MELTS-
I have given an example on how to use the Software below.
You might possibly look at some Artic ports where Glacier melts have been verified? Greenland, Iceland, Norway etc Where the land HAS risen. PS some of the Data seems to show that around Africa, the sea/land height is variable? If I remember.
***********
from a previous posting................................>
I hope that nobody assumes the implication that the ocean rises today are slowing.

I am also disappointed in those that do not seem to believe the mass of data that Daniel has supplied, to verify that the oceans are rising steadily today.

Since the the oceans occupy 7/10's of the Earths surface. Parts of the sea bed are subject to small movements, up and down on occasions.

Which is why I would like to draw everybodys attention to the "Actual Ocean Rises" as measured and logged by real people all over the world, every month, for the last sixty years.
Nothing technical sixty years ago, ...just real humans, in most cases unknown to each other, taking thousands of manual sea height measurements from Sea Walls, Lighthouse walls, Concrete and Wooden sea Posts, Port walls and others.
Measurements which were originaly started by people interested in high-tide reading.

All of these real human readings have been logged and preserved.
Thats thousands of sea height readings from most every country with a sea border in the world.
Real human measurements from, hundreds of seaboard towns in
-India, China, Europe, Canada, Russia, Norway and so on.

Now go direct to those thousands of logged manual readings, still being logged today, by real people from the same walls and posts that were used sixty, or more years ago.

Goto :-
http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/psmsl_individual_stations.html

...and after finding your Country/Port of choice, click on the
SECOND Column (Pm) to see the minute sea rises that have been manually logged over the past sixty years.

To start you off:- MACAU, near Hong Kong. CHINA (609/001)

http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/pubi/rlr.monthly.plots/609001.gif

...and one more, this goes back to 1875! - MUMBAI, INDIA. (500/041)

http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/pubi/rlr.monthly.plots/500041.gif

Remember these are real manual readings taken by real people,
month after month for more than sixty years in a lot of cases.
People being human might be expected to miss a few readings from
time to time. Even make mistakes in bad weather.
Hopefully this will back up what Daniel has been trying to tell us for some time now.





_________________________
.

.
"You will never find a real Human being - Even in a mirror." ....Mike Kremer.



Top
#24613 - 01/19/08 08:38 PM Re: Glacier Woes Overstated? [Re: Mike Kremer]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Lots of data there Mike thanks.

I especially liked this one.

Quote:
...and one more, this goes back to 1875! - MUMBAI, INDIA. (500/041)

http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/pubi/rlr.monthly.plots/500041.gif


look at the year 1943 , I wonder why sea levels might have risen that high in 1943?

WW2 perhaps?


_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#24615 - 01/20/08 03:21 AM Re: Glacier Woes Overstated? [Re: paul]
Mike Kremer Offline

Megastar

Registered: 10/16/04
Posts: 1696
Loc: London UK
Originally Posted By: paul
Lots of data there Mike thanks.

I especially liked this one.

Quote:
...and one more, this goes back to 1875! - MUMBAI, INDIA. (500/041)

http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/pubi/rlr.monthly.plots/500041.gif


look at the year 1943 , I wonder why sea levels might have risen that high in 1943?

WW2 perhaps?



[quote=Mike Kremer] 2 Paul

Glad you like the URL,Paul
http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/psmsl_individual_stations.html

I was amazed when I first found it, I spent a long time looking
when I realised The Port of London kept Jetty tidal marks.

World WarII, -or constant sea/land wind, volcanic or El-Nino?

One can only average out the readings? I am not sure that would help, from a scientific viewpoint.
Which is why I have always advocated using the latest updated readings where Global warming is concerned.
Still, the majority of these mantaken reading, often do show a slight trend upwards for ocean heights...over the 60 years.

Let me know if you find any Sea level downward trends, around Artic ports
_________________________
.

.
"You will never find a real Human being - Even in a mirror." ....Mike Kremer.



Top



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.