Quote
Quote
Quote
Jake,

Are we taking into account the "Lay of the land" as it were.

For example, one of our lakes here in NM was sooooo low, (reported 80') Now, this summer, there was enough rain in the area, to cause a 20' rise over 3 weeks, now my guess is that if we have the same amount of water flow (in and out) it would take an ever increasing amount of time (there for water) to completely fill the lake. Islands dissappear and such.

As the water rises, flows past mountains and hills and into valleys.

Humm,


I don't follow you - the melting doesn't have anything to do with rain and is simply a function of the volume of water contained in the ice that melts and contributes to the oceans.


Correct, but as the water levels rise weather it be from melting ice or rain fall, the change of the shorelines will cause a need for more and more water to cause a rise in water level.

Does that make sence? More surface area, more water per inch in rise.


Yeah ... but geeesh...I only had a few minutes to contribute and I refuse to pull out my calculus books. Even then, you're probably talking about, at most, a 5% difference in the result (for which the amount of error is likely already more than that) since the oceans already consume 71% of the earth's surface.

Jake Kohl