On Jun 17, 9:45*pm, Graham P Davis wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jun 17, 6:38 pm, Rodney Blackall
wrote:
In article
,
* *Weatherlawyer wrote:

BTW how will sea ice melting cause problems down here? It won't raise
the sea level. In fact rumour has it that een if Greenland's sheet is
removed most of that will have little effect too neither as most of
Greenland is an archipelago apparently.

What rubbish! Not true, in fact it is worse. If ice is removed from
Greenland, isostatic release means the underlying rock will rise slowly
and raise sea-level further.

Not if *Greenland is a matrix of islands masquerading as a lump of
snow covered rock it ain't.

For the Greenland ice not to have any effect on sea level if it were to
melt, it has to be floating. So you are saying that Greenland is a 2000+
metre-high iceberg floating in the middle of an archipelago? That would mean
the ocean beneath the iceberg would be 18,000 metres deep. Almost twice the
depth of the Mariana Trench is going some!

I am not saying that it is or it isn't. I recently read an article
following some research about Greenland, suggesting it might indeed be
a lagoon shaped landmass.

What I am saying is that we do not know what the problem will be when
and if things go from bad to worse.

Personally I'd move there if I liked fish and reindeer meat, if they
could guarantee a few decades of sunny but not too warm weather. As
for England flooding, what harm would it do? We could make sure all
the walls they built around it were repaired and well waterproofed.