It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: mc_squared
No, it makes perfect sense.
All you have to do is read up a little on angular momentum to understand. I see Phage already explained it perfectly with the ice skater analogy.
But it's responses like this (and all the stars it received) that imo sum up the insane anti-science sentiment here. Take any subject with the slightest bit of complexity or counter-intuitiveness, and instead of curiosity and outside-the-box thinking (i.e. the exact sort of things that drive science itself) - all you get is tardiness and negativity, followed by backslapping for that primitive way of thinking.
I wish we had internet in the days of ancient Greece, so we could go back and see how many stars this exact same comment would've received, when some smarmy sandal-wearing kook had the audacity to suggest the Earth might be round too.
originally posted by: mamabeth
a reply to: Phage
Couldn't what I asked possibly cause the sea levels to rise?
originally posted by: lostbook
Just reporting the article to ATS, as-is.
It makes sense to me. When the glaciers melt, there will be more moving water. I could be wrong but I assume that water is heavier than ice-that's why ice floats in water. As more water is added to the Oceans, the Earth will be slowed down to account for that extra water; eventually things will probably get back to normal as we know it. This is my non-scientific perspective.
If the Earth's rotation has slowed by 4.5 hours over the last 2500 years, doesn't that mean that the length of a day in 500 B.C was about 19.5 hours?
originally posted by: greencmp
The apparent appeal to ecofanticists is strong though. I am suspicious of the motives of people attempting to attribute significance to this.