cure for rising ocean levels

[jusplay4fun]

We already discussed that idea and NoMadP lost that debate (anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions), as he is losing here, by use of bad facts, no sources, bad sources, bad logic, and the combination of all of the above. Now we can add bad calculations to that list, as I already suggested.

https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=230657

NoMadP cannot carry on a discussion that requires use of facts or use of logic.

yeah I goofed my calculation on the pacific ocean size. i will give ya that...
the point of this forum topic is to create a box.. you can think inside the box.. you can think outside the box.. you can criticize me for creating the box in the 1st place. .but in the end. the box engages ideas.. ideas create solutions..
the point is to figure out a solution..

There is already perfectly a serviceable idea out there for addressing rising sea levels: namely, abate the source, anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

[NomadPatriot]

We already discussed that idea and NoMadP lost that debate (anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions), as he is losing here, by use of bad facts, no sources, bad sources, bad logic, and the combination of all of the above. Now we can add bad calculations to that list, as I already suggested.

https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=230657

NoMadP cannot carry on a discussion that requires use of facts or use of logic.

yeah I goofed my calculation on the pacific ocean size. i will give ya that...
the point of this forum topic is to create a box.. you can think inside the box.. you can think outside the box.. you can criticize me for creating the box in the 1st place. .but in the end. the box engages ideas.. ideas create solutions..
the point is to figure out a solution..

There is already perfectly a serviceable idea out there for addressing rising sea levels: namely, abate the source, anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

hey everyone guess what ...JP is focusing on me once again!!!
"you can criticize me for creating the box in the 1st place"

let's reference his The Mercury News/ 1.5 star Yelp reviewed source some more...
try focusing on the topic.. not the opponent JP...

or better yet let's piss him off by forcing him to research & type out shit for the next 3 hours. .he loves doing that..

[Metsfanmax]

let's reference his The Mercury News/ 1.5 star Yelp reviewed source some more...
try focusing on the topic.. not the opponent JP...

I can understand why you might not be familiar with the San Jose's The Mercury News -- I wasn't familiar with it before I moved to the San Francisco area. Nevertheless, it is one of the largest circulation newspapers in the United States; there is no reason to reject it out of hand as you are doing. Also, that article is just explaining what current California desalination plans are and how the technology works, so I don't even understand your motivation in criticizing it.

[jusplay4fun]

You fell for my trap, NoMADP. I did not need 3 hours of research for the trap, either time. You're so full of CRAP that you got inundated by all the CRAP you spew out. Game, Set, and Match. That means you LOST, again.

[NomadPatriot]

You fell for my trap, NoMADP. I did not need 3 hours of research for the trap, either time. You're so full of CRAP that you got inundated by all the CRAP you spew out. Game, Set, and Match. That means you LOST, again.

" You will get "picked on" or bullied by at least one or two until you stop" - JP

[Bernie Sanders]

You fell for my trap, NoMADP. I did not need 3 hours of research for the trap, either time. You're so full of CRAP that you got inundated by all the CRAP you spew out. Game, Set, and Match. That means you LOST, again.

" You will get "picked on" or bullied by at least one or two until you stop" - JP

Stop picking on my illegitimate son Nomad. He really tries hard debating your nonsense by introducing copy/paste factual articles and then you respond with your alternative facts.

Let the kid declare himself a winner in this thread, so he can run upstairs to his mother's room and brag how he beat up an internet troll.

[jusplay4fun]

I will give NomadP credit for two things here:

1) he admits to a mistake he made;

2) he posted a topic and thread that caused reasonable and rationale discussion of some serious problems in the world (his "box").

That discussion has gone well beyond the usual post by a troll with one sentence responses full of insult and lacking of thought and facts. The discussion the past few days on Global Warming and "free" education have been interesting and worth reading and discussing. This is well above the usual dribble that plagues most discussions and most threads in CC.

Well done, NomadP.

I will simply add that I tend to disagree with you, NomadP, on most of your ideas, but you do have a few good ones sometimes.

JP


NomadP stated:

yeah I goofed my calculation on the pacific ocean size. i will give ya that...
the point of this forum topic is to create a box.. you can think inside the box.. you can think outside the box.. you can criticize me for creating the box in the 1st place. .but in the end. the box engages ideas.. ideas create solutions..
the point is to figure out a solution..

[jimboston]

The plan relies on vastly under calculating the amount of water a couple of inches of ocean would be. I recommend asking your mom to take you on a boat ride in one of the oceans.

let's calculate then!

One acre-foot of water (the amount of water covering 1 acre to a depth of 1 foot) equals 326,000 gallons or 43,560 cubic feet of water, and weighs 2.7 million pounds. so 1 inch would be 326,000 / 12 = 27,166 gallons per 1 acre of water that is 1 inch deep

the pacific ocean is roughly 63,000,000 acres.

63,000,000 acres x 27,166 gallons per 1 inch of an acre of water = 1,711,458,000,000 gallons
so 1.7 trillion gallons of water per 1 inch of depth in the pacific ocean..

for perspective. .Lake Michigan holds 1,000,000,000,000,000 gallons , 1 Quadrillion gallons of water..

1,000,000,000,000,000 gallons ( 1 lake Michigan) divided 1,711,458,000,000 gallons ( 1 inch of Pacific ocean water ) = 584

so lake Michigan would hold 584 inches of the pacific ocean..
584 divided by 12 = 48 feet..
if you created a 1 lake Michigan inland anywhere on the planet.. & filled it with cleaned desalinated distilled ocean water.. ocean levels in the pacific would drop 48 feet..

isn't math fun!!!!
( that took 8 minutes to look up the figures calculate & type it out….)

How do you propose to move this water from the ocean to this inland sea/lake you plan to dig?

Just to give you an idea, the reservoirs for the Metro Boston region supply this area with 200,000,000 gallons of water per day.
This water system wasn’t built overnight but grew over decades.

Now that it’s fully built, it’s moving 200,000,000 gallons a day.

At that rate, it would take 5,000,000 days to move the amount of water you suggest.
That excludes any loss due to evaporation or other loss.

So assuming we could build the pipes to move the water in a few years... it would then take about 13,700 years to move the amount of water you suggest.

That’s assuming nothing breaks over that time.

Now you can build a bigger system, I mean Boston isn’t the biggest city... but we’re talking the Metro Boston region, so it’s a pretty populous area.

You could also move less water.

Maybe we can get the project down to a couple thousand years?

The World's Largest Water Pump Moves 15 Olympic-Sized Swimming Pools Every Minute (150,000 gallons per second)

https://gizmodo.com/the-worlds-largest-water-pump-moves-15-olympic-sized-sw-5800072

that's nearly 13 billion gallons a day..
Boston Sucks.. ( so I've heard...)

Again I say, if you had a brain you’d be dangerous.

Even if the pump could move that amount of water that fast, your project would still take over 200 years.
That’s certainly better than 13,700 years, but still not really very practical.

Of course you are just looking at numbers and not really understanding them... and you’re ignoring Poiseuille's Law.

“Flow rate varies inversely to length, so if you double the length of the pipe while keeping the diameter constant, you'll get roughly half as much water through it per unit of time at constant pressure and temperature.”

So the location of this proposed inland sea or lake would greatly impact how long it would take to move a serious volume of water. This super-pump you talk about gives you a flow rate at some specified length.... a length much much less than you’d need.

My example of the MWRA water system is relevant because it’s actually moving 200,000,000 gallons a day 65miles from the reservoir to Boston. It’s not necessarily a perfect example because your proposed inland water containment system may be closer or further.... but it’s an actual working system.

You may have heard Boston sucks... but your brain sucks worse.

If you want to say something outlandish you might want to put a little thought into it if you can.

[jimboston]

I will give NomadP credit for two things here:

1) he admits to a mistake he made;

2) he posted a topic and thread that caused reasonable and rationale discussion of some serious problems in the world (his "box").

That discussion has gone well beyond the usual post by a troll with one sentence responses full of insult and lacking of thought and facts. The discussion the past few days on Global Warming and "free" education have been interesting and worth reading and discussing. This is well above the usual dribble that plagues most discussions and most threads in CC.

Well done, NomadP.

I will simply add that I tend to disagree with you, NomadP, on most of your ideas, but you do have a few good ones sometimes.

JP


NomadP stated:

yeah I goofed my calculation on the pacific ocean size. i will give ya that...
the point of this forum topic is to create a box.. you can think inside the box.. you can think outside the box.. you can criticize me for creating the box in the 1st place. .but in the end. the box engages ideas.. ideas create solutions..
the point is to figure out a solution..

He still threw out a bunch of uninformed insults along the way.... so um NO!

[NomadPatriot]

Again I say, if you had a brain you’d be dangerous.Even if the pump could move that amount of water that fast, your project would still take over 200 years.That’s certainly better than 13,700 years, but still not really very practical.Of course you are just looking at numbers and not really understanding them... and you’re ignoring Poiseuille's Law.“Flow rate varies inversely to length, so if you double the length of the pipe while keeping the diameter constant, you'll get roughly half as much water through it per unit of time at constant pressure and temperature.”So the location of this proposed inland sea or lake would greatly impact how long it would take to move a serious volume of water. This super-pump you talk about gives you a flow rate at some specified length.... a length much much less than you’d need.My example of the MWRA water system is relevant because it’s actually moving 200,000,000 gallons a day 65miles from the reservoir to Boston. It’s not necessarily a perfect example because your proposed inland water containment system may be closer or further.... but it’s an actual working system.

I already stated:

3- lake Michigan was ( as I said) used for Perspective. it doesn't have to be 1 massive fresh water reservoir in 1 location.. it could be 500 reservoirs divided up accordingly to country size.. 1 or 2 for small countries.. 4-5 for medium countries 5+ for large countries.. or whatever the need would be for the respective countries..

so. your over 200 years divided by my 500 reservoirs. = about 5 months..

[nietzsche]

I picture Mets' turning NP around, putting vaseline only on the tip of his "nerdiness", but only on the tip.. and telling him "don't worry.. it has vaseline and it's small.." ... and suddenly, well see Mets introduce all of his huge nerdiness in one abrupt movement..

[NomadPatriot]

let's reference his The Mercury News/ 1.5 star Yelp reviewed source some more...
try focusing on the topic.. not the opponent JP...

I can understand why you might not be familiar with the San Jose's The Mercury News -- I wasn't familiar with it before I moved to the San Francisco area. Nevertheless, it is one of the largest circulation newspapers in the United States; there is no reason to reject it out of hand as you are doing. Also, that article is just explaining what current California desalination plans are and how the technology works, so I don't even understand your motivation in criticizing it.

they have a 1.5 Yelp rating..
for Perspective..
Alex Jones Productions ( InfoWars.com) has a 3.5 Yelp rating..
Infowars ….
infowars.com Is rated higher then this Mercury Times thing...

if you are going to a 1.5 star rated news source for your information.. . and you trust what they are printing or distributing. well that is on you.
I personally am not going to use it as a credible reference for information..

[jimboston]

Again I say, if you had a brain you’d be dangerous.Even if the pump could move that amount of water that fast, your project would still take over 200 years.That’s certainly better than 13,700 years, but still not really very practical.Of course you are just looking at numbers and not really understanding them... and you’re ignoring Poiseuille's Law.“Flow rate varies inversely to length, so if you double the length of the pipe while keeping the diameter constant, you'll get roughly half as much water through it per unit of time at constant pressure and temperature.”So the location of this proposed inland sea or lake would greatly impact how long it would take to move a serious volume of water. This super-pump you talk about gives you a flow rate at some specified length.... a length much much less than you’d need.My example of the MWRA water system is relevant because it’s actually moving 200,000,000 gallons a day 65miles from the reservoir to Boston. It’s not necessarily a perfect example because your proposed inland water containment system may be closer or further.... but it’s an actual working system.

I already stated:

3- lake Michigan was ( as I said) used for Perspective. it doesn't have to be 1 massive fresh water reservoir in 1 location.. it could be 500 reservoirs divided up accordingly to country size.. 1 or 2 for small countries.. 4-5 for medium countries 5+ for large countries.. or whatever the need would be for the respective countries..

so. your over 200 years divided by my 500 reservoirs. = about 5 months..

Is there enough raw materials in the world to build the infrastructure for these 500 massive projects?

I mean just think about the piping alone.

Then there’s electricity to run these pumps. I suppose you can use solar, but you’d have to build those too.

Manpower.

... gotta dig those reservoirs and/or build some dams.

You’re probably gonna displace some people... a lot of people... so there’s some new housing and the social unrest that goes alone with forced moves. A lot of the best locations for these types of reservoirs are also locations like valleys that are/were good places for people to settle. One example from China...

https://www.fastcompany.com/3029421/ins ... gorges-dam

... but there are many other examples. In Massachusetts the MWRA reservoir I mentioned earlier is a flooded valley that displaced three villages.

So yeah... great idea. It’ll be done in 5 months, six at most!


If you want. To take credit for ‘thinking out of the box’ great... go pat yourself on the back.
You might want to have a basic understanding of like... something.
(As opposed to a basic understanding of nothing.)

[jimboston]

they have a 1.5 Yelp rating..
for Perspective..
Alex Jones Productions ( InfoWars.com) has a 3.5 Yelp rating..
Infowars ….
infowars.com Is rated higher then this Mercury Times thing...

if you are going to a 1.5 star rated news source for your information.. . and you trust what they are printing or distributing. well that is on you.
I personally am not going to use it as a credible reference for information..

Article 1:

Presented as further proof that NP is an idiot and doesn’t understand how Yelp works.

Let me know if you’d like me to explain it to you NP.
I can try if you want, but I know it’s gonna be hard for you.
I’ll try to make it really really simple for you.

[HitRed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression

If we made a cut from the Mediterranean to the Qattara Depression the water would flow in by gravity. The Qattara Depression contains the second lowest point in Africa. Due to its size and proximity to the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, studies have been made for the potential to generate hydroelectricity here.

[NomadPatriot]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression

If we made a cut from the Mediterranean to the Qattara Depression the water would flow in by gravity. The Qattara Depression contains the second lowest point in Africa. Due to its size and proximity to the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, studies have been made for the potential to generate hydroelectricity here.

good point Hitred. thinking of ways to solve the problem.. instead of being on the constant attack of the opponent..
a true debater.

the Qattara Depression is 7,570 square miles & 436 feet deep.. that's 1/3 the size and half the depth of Lake Michigan..
good find!

[jimboston]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression

If we made a cut from the Mediterranean to the Qattara Depression the water would flow in by gravity. The Qattara Depression contains the second lowest point in Africa. Due to its size and proximity to the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, studies have been made for the potential to generate hydroelectricity here.

good point Hitred. thinking of ways to solve the problem.. instead of being on the constant attack of the opponent..
a true debater.

the Qattara Depression is 7,570 square miles & 436 feet deep.. that's 1/3 the size and half the depth of Lake Michigan..
good find!

Maybe it’s a good idea. Though the people using this area produce salt might object.

Still... it’s not an idea either of you came up with... nor is the idea to reduce sea level but rather to create hydro-power.

[HitRed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression

If we made a cut from the Mediterranean to the Qattara Depression the water would flow in by gravity. The Qattara Depression contains the second lowest point in Africa. Due to its size and proximity to the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, studies have been made for the potential to generate hydroelectricity here.

good point Hitred. thinking of ways to solve the problem.. instead of being on the constant attack of the opponent..
a true debater.

the Qattara Depression is 7,570 square miles & 436 feet deep.. that's 1/3 the size and half the depth of Lake Michigan..
good find!

Maybe it’s a good idea. Though the people using this area produce salt might object.

Still... it’s not an idea either of you came up with... nor is the idea to reduce sea level but rather to create hydro-power.

Is it ok to reduce sea levels AND create hydro-power? Was that in the rules and I didn't see it.

Also you using piping isn't an original idea.

[jimboston]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression

If we made a cut from the Mediterranean to the Qattara Depression the water would flow in by gravity. The Qattara Depression contains the second lowest point in Africa. Due to its size and proximity to the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, studies have been made for the potential to generate hydroelectricity here.

good point Hitred. thinking of ways to solve the problem.. instead of being on the constant attack of the opponent..
a true debater.

the Qattara Depression is 7,570 square miles & 436 feet deep.. that's 1/3 the size and half the depth of Lake Michigan..
good find!

Maybe it’s a good idea. Though the people using this area produce salt might object.

Still... it’s not an idea either of you came up with... nor is the idea to reduce sea level but rather to create hydro-power.

Is it ok to reduce sea levels AND create hydro-power? Was that in the rules and I didn't see it.

Also you using piping isn't an original idea.

Listen Red, you’re just getting caught in the crossfire.

Your suggestion and link to the Qattara Depression is fine.
It also has problems. I’m just saying.

I also doubt that it’d make a significant impact on ocean level...but that’s for Nomad’s ‘math’.

My using piping isn’t an idea or suggestion.... it was me pointing out the ridiculousness of Nomad’s idea.

[NomadPatriot]

I like Jimmy's ideas..
oh wait..

hmmmmmm

not sure why someone would constantly argue every idea brought up without offering any ideas of their own... almost like they.. are only here.. to.. argue..

[jimboston]

I like Jimmy's ideas..
oh wait..

hmmmmmm

not sure why someone would constantly argue every idea brought up without offering any ideas of their own... almost like they.. are only here.. to.. argue..

I don’t argue with good ideas.

I do enjoy pointing out dumb ones.

[Metsfanmax]

let's reference his The Mercury News/ 1.5 star Yelp reviewed source some more...
try focusing on the topic.. not the opponent JP...

I can understand why you might not be familiar with the San Jose's The Mercury News -- I wasn't familiar with it before I moved to the San Francisco area. Nevertheless, it is one of the largest circulation newspapers in the United States; there is no reason to reject it out of hand as you are doing. Also, that article is just explaining what current California desalination plans are and how the technology works, so I don't even understand your motivation in criticizing it.

they have a 1.5 Yelp rating..
for Perspective..
Alex Jones Productions ( InfoWars.com) has a 3.5 Yelp rating..
Infowars ….
infowars.com Is rated higher then this Mercury Times thing...

if you are going to a 1.5 star rated news source for your information.. . and you trust what they are printing or distributing. well that is on you.
I personally am not going to use it as a credible reference for information..

Fair point, I forgot that Yelp is known for its newspaper ratings. Here are some other trashy publications on Yelp, as judged by a rating lower than InfoWars:

The New York Times (2.5)
The Washington Post (1.5)
The Wall Street Journal (1.5)
The Los Angeles Times (1.5)

Have you heard of them? Me neither.

[NomadPatriot]

Fair point, I forgot that Yelp is known for its newspaper ratings. Here are some other trashy publications on Yelp, as judged by a rating lower than InfoWars:The New York Times (2.5)The Washington Post (1.5)The Wall Street Journal (1.5)The Los Angeles Times (1.5)Have you heard of them? Me neither.

let's see if there is a pattern going on here.. :

the New York Times (rated 2.5 ) --> " The failure of the anti-Trump movement has its roots in the failure to recognize the social imbalance that got President Donald Trump elected in the first place, vocal anti-Trumper David Brooks writes in a column for The New York Times. anti-trump, new york times, columnist, david brooks, failure."

the Washington Post (rated 1.5) --> "The Washington Post Takes Anti-Trump Bias To A New Level. In contrast, just 81% of Republicans and 56% of independents said Trump shouldn't. In other words, Democrats are far out of the mainstream on this question, which is just another way of saying that Democrats deeply loathe and distrust Trump."

The Wall Street Journal (rated 1.5) --> "as Donald Trump continues his Shermanesque march through the Republican primaries, the Wall Street Journal continues to fire relentless volleys of cheap shots, pot shots, and the paper’s much hoped for gut shot."

The Los Angeles Times ( rated 1.5) --> "The Los Angeles Times editorial board is set to release a book on America’s birthday that bashes her current president"

Alex Jones / Infowars ( rated 3.5 ) --> "Alex Jones: Why I Love Donald Trump ... Alex Jones reveals the reasons why he loves Donald Trump and why he thinks he will be a great president"

… 1 of these is not like the others .
and that 1 has a significant higher Rating then the others
can you figure out why...?

[jimboston]