Question:
Will the ICE melting at
the
poles
result in an increase in Plate Tectonics, resulting in more
seismic
activity, more earthquakes, and a lot more volcanic
activity? If
so,
do we need to be concerned?
What if the actual affect of
GLOBAL
WARMING is a displacement of MASS on the earth's crust
causing
an
increase in the shifting of the earth's Tectonic Plates due
to less
mass or
weight on the crust in one place where the weight of
that
mass then gets
shifted to other areas of the earth's crust.
The weight
of ICE at the poles
that
melts WILL have an affect on the earth's crust at the
polar
regions.
As the pole regions don't have that weight of the ice
anymore,
then
the crust of the earth in that area will rise. The ICE
that melts
will
turn into water that increases the amount of water AND
WEIGHT of
the oceans on
the earth's crust in other places.
There is evidence where
the
ADDITIONAL
weight caused by water when they build dams, where the
weight
of the
water has an affect on the earth's crust where they have
observed
an
increase in earthquakes as a result.
See: A
Link Between Dams and Earthquakes?
http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2009/0
2/a-link-between-da
ms-and-earthquakes/
What affect will 1-2 feet or
more
of
water in the oceans have on the earths crust. Will the
overall
weight of
the water cause changes in the earth's crust?
Will the
power of tidal
activity change due to the increased volume
of water?
What affect will the
additional weight shifting of more
MASSIVE tidal
activity have on the earth's
crust, if any?
This is not a wild thought, as
there
are
those in the fields of science already writing about
this (google
for it, but
below is a sample article).
See: Global
Warming Might
Spur Earthquakes and Volcanoes
http://www.livescience.com/7366-
global-warming-spur-earthquakes-volcanoe
s.html
There
is a cause and affect. For almost every action, there
is
a
potential for an equal and opposite reaction (it's
interesting where
science
is, vs belief).
Historical evidence is - that
as the
glaciers form, they
press down on the earth's crust due to
the huge
amount of weight. Then,
when they melt, the earth's
crust
rebounds.
We all know that
as the earth's
crust
moves, there is a huge amount of friction, causing heat,
melting
rocks, and increased pressure due to the expansion of the
melting
rocks, that pressure, along with the melted rock has to go
somewhere,
so it finds a hole or a weak area to escape...).
But,
we
often don't understand all the factors about why the earth's
crust
is
moving! What causes earth crust movement, earthquakes,
and
volcanoes?
Weight of water, and/or ice, is only one
potential
factor. When you add in the rest of the factors....
the
sum
total together (when we look at a few percent of a factor)
then one
part of
that sum total, might be a "critical affect
factor"
that actually
causes the event. Where one factor of
many might
cause more in the end,
than we first might
think.
http://en.wikipedia
.org/wiki/Post-
glacial_rebound
Quotes: --
"According to
the
Mohr-Coulomb
Theory<
/U>
of
rock failure, large glacial loads generally suppress
earthquakes, but
rapid deglaciation promotes earthquakes". --
"One of the
possible impacts of global warming-triggered rebound may be
more
volcanic activity in previously ice-capped areas such
as
Iceland".
The Adirondack Mountains are
still
rebounding (due to the melting of the ice during the last
ice
age).
Lake Champlain, and many other lakes, exist because of
this
rebounding.
A questions remains as to the affect of
the water
rise
in the seas and the additional weight of those bodies
of water
on the
crust. Of course, the tides could become more
powerful
due to there being
"more water" affected by the
moon.
The tides weigh a lot, and
when the tide comes in, there is
more
weight on the land under it, when the
tides go out there is
less
weight. Day after day after day this happens,
and what
is the
long term affect of this?
Well, we do know that there
is
rebound in the earth's crust that affects the magnatude of
tides...
so, is
there also an affect of the tides themselves on the
earth's
crust?
http://en.wikipedia.o
rg/wiki/Tidal_acceleration
Quote: --"In
addition to the
effect of the ocean tides, there is also a
tidal
acceleration due to flexing of
the earth's crust, but this
accounts
for only about 4% of the total effect when
expressed in
terms of heat
dissipation".
http://earthquake.usg
s.gov/learn/faq/?
faqID=109
Quote: --
"There have also been
some small but significant
correlations
reported between the semi-diurnal tides
and the rate of
occurrence of
aftershocks in some volcanic regions, such
asMammoth Lakes.
(UC
Berkeley) (Thanks to Gary Fuis for contributing content to
this
FAQ.)".
http://www.pl
atetectonics.com/article.asp?
a=37&c=14
Quotes: --
"Few
realize that the solid earth also exhibits tidal
behavior,
with bulges on
opposite sides of the globe, also driven by
the moon.
At HVO, we can actually
measure these tides with our
tiltmeters and
strainmeters". -- "Who
would have thought that
the moon
had that kind of power, not only to be able to
cause the
world's
oceans to bulge, but also to squeeze terra firma twice a
day? But it
does, so it should not come as a complete shock that
reputable
scientists have suggested that these squeezings might
influence
whether a volcano will erupt or not". -- "More
than
25
years ago, a pair of earth scientists compared the records
for 680
eruptions
that occurred since 1900 and found that "the
probability of an eruption is
greatest at times of maximum
tidal
amplitude." In plainer language,
volcanoes are more
likely to
erupt at the fortnightly (or 14-day)
"high"
tide". --
"The correlation is more important as a
clue to how
volcanoes
work. The effect of the tides suggests that a volcano can
remain in a
state of near eruption for a period of time before some
threshold
is
exceeded and an eruption starts. There are probably many
possible
mechanisms
for exceeding that threshold -- the lunar tides
are but
one". So, for
every action, there is the potential
for an
equal and opposite reaction.
As
we know, when the earth's crust shifts, it causes
earthquakes
and
volcanism.
So, what would the affect be on the
human population if this
happens?
The below link is
worth a
couple of
minutes to take a look at. Good science and well written
with good
illustrations. Volcano science sites regarding the origins
of
the
Dark Ages (could this be more than a hypothesis, where it is
actually
what
will happen in our future) ?
See this web page below(s)
titled:
Were
the Dark Ages Triggered by Volcano-Related Climate
Changes
in the 6th
Century?
(If so, was Krakatau volcano
the
culprit?)
by Ken Wohletz
Los Alamos National Laboratory
http://
www.ees1.lanl.gov/W
ohletz/Krakatau.htm
And see:
535 AD The
"Dark
Ages"
Begin Scientific Growth Stops !
http:/
/www.hbci.com/~weno
nah/history/535ad.htm
Also see -
http://doctor.claudemariottini.com/2008/04/jose
ph-and-seven-years-of-
famine.html
(Was this story in the bible
actually
related to a
eruption of a volcano on the other side of the
world at
that time???) Hmmm?
Something happened to cause crops to
fail for
7 years. What was
it?
So, with the evidence of crops
failing
in Egypt during
biblical times, and with evidence of about
the same
many years of crop failures
around the times of the start
dark ages
(per the links), where both might have
been caused by a
volcano,
...until the sun came back to full strength again,
then
everyone on
earth would need to be planning for such an event - if it
were
possible that it were to happen in our future (planning
would need to
be
done on an ongoing basis for many years ahead of such a
surprise).
The question might not be IF
it will
happen,
as it is obvious that the question is WHEN it will
happen
again? AND is there
anything that humans are doing now on
earth to
make it happen
quicker?
The problem NOW is, that there
a too
many people
in the world maybe to store 7 years of food for
all to
eat during such a time?
With the number of people on
earth
today to feed, if this
type of world affecting disaster were
to
happen, then all the deer, rats, mice,
cats, dogs, worms,
etc ... all
wild creatures would be eaten very quickly by a
starving
human
population who would have guns that they didn't have in 525
AD.
Would fish have a chance? Maybe? Depending on where they
were.
Fish in the
ocean might, or might not, miss the slaughter
due to the
size of the ocean
(might be too big to find them all).
However, fish
in lakes and rivers - would
have a slim chance of survival
(as they
would not find it easy to escape the
net, or avoid floating
to the
top after being exposed to oxygen deprived water
due to
chemicals
being dumped into the water, or avoid feeling the shock of a
stick of
explosive or electric current).
One TV show I
saw of the Dark
Ages.
The scientists showed evidence of bone of humans found
in
"campfire
pits" that were carbon dated to this time, and the
bones had
evidence of tool damage. The conclusion is that some humans
during
this time, were eating other humans to survive (meaning that
there
was
so little food due to the volcano clouds hiding the sun
and
causing crops to
fail and that animals could not eat either,
so
humans had fewer animals to eat
too). So, people could only
eat,
what they could eat, it might mean that they
would start to
eat other
people?
It is my guess that the
story
of Hansel
and Gretel came from the dark ages - Why from the dark
ages?
See-
http:/
/en.wikipedia.org/w
iki/Hansel_and_Gretel
- do you know this story.
I
have a reason for thinking
that it
dates back to this in the dark ages. As it
would have been
obvious
during this time, that parents did not want the
children to
wander
away from them (easy to kill a child vs a full grown human).
And so
it is my guess that this story was told at the camp fire to
all
the
children over and over again - then it was repeated and
repeated by
word of
mouth even when food started to grow again. Anyway,
it made
it into print as
it was a widely used story. I don't know
this
history is true (the story part)
but it makes sense that
when people
are eating people, that the parents would
have to tell the
children
some story.
Instead of
fighting, the
people of the
world should be living in harmony and planning for
a day
when this
volcano will happen again. And should we do anything about
Global
Warming? Or should we just imagine that we are ok, and
that
changes
to the earth's crust are not important to consider at all?
The
answer to the question, if
we
consider the facts (using the Socratic method) -
is obvious.
Due to the potential for
future changes
in the
earth's crust being an ever increasing dynamic with
greater
potentials going
forward.. My guess is that it might be
better odds
that humans will see this
type of "volcano eruption
disaster"
long before any meteor from space
causes a catastrophe.
If either a rock from space
that
hits
earth, or a volcano like in the links above happens, we
could see
the
human crisis reach a point where you could see the human
condition
deteriorate very quickly after the end of one growing season
with
no
food to feed people or the animals that we grow in meat
factories.
The
situation would be like Katrina and the chaos in New
Orleans,
only everywhere
in the entire world.
Science and medicine can not
help
if
the sun goes away. Governments all over the world should be
ready
for such
a day, as volcano eruptions are hard to predict.
Many
volcano eruptions
happen by surprise, and storing several
years of
food away (like the Old
Testament's Joseph and the 7 years
of famine
story).
AND -
Power from the SUN would
be a
problem. Only way to survive is if we had an
ability to
power growing
lights in massive indoor greenhouses to produce food.
Can
you
imagine? Maybe we should start to build these green houses
now?
Would a Noah's Ark for animals
make any
sense? We would
need to have more than two breeding pairs
to replace
them. Africa would see
instant wipe out of vast wild animal
populations. Would be a big job after 7
years of crop
failure to
even start to repair the damage. Countries and
civilization
would
crumble (like they did in 535 AD). So, putting everything
back in
order would be an almost unimaginable task. We have the
larger
brain
that is needed to survive and thrive most any future
situation that nature and
the universe can throw at us (not
all, but
most)...!
So, is
Global warming an
issue. Yes it
is. WOULD it be wise to attack it now, not
later?
Could Thorium as an Atomic
Energy
Source (for short
term power, and maybe to power a massive
number of
Noah' green houses, ...and
other GREEN Energy (SUN, wind,
waves, etc) solve our problems better than
anything else?
Believe
it or not, there would be an ECONOMY to all this
too!
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|