It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Picture shows how all the water on Earth would fit into one 860-mile-wide ball

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on May, 9 2012 @ 06:21 AM
reply to post by RealSpoke

Oh but:

The crust/mantle/outer core/inner core is extremely thick.

You just "defined" three separate layers!!!


The "CRUST" is one layer.

The "MANTLE"....which is "semi-fluidic", is not a "layer" is part of the MANTLE!!!!

The "Outer Core"?? is far beyond our ability to directly access....but......the MASS of the planet we live one defines the basics of the FACT that we are living on a SOLID planet....with some 'fluidic' aspects going on, below the relatively "thin" crust that we live on......

....just RESEARCH, a bit!!!!

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 06:26 AM
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein

you beat me to it!! Yes water is a very small percentage of the earth. Us humans too!! very small pct!! lol

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 06:47 AM
reply to post by ProudBird

There are four layers or five if you include the upper mantle, you should research a bit. Especially if you're going to talk condescending to people. At least make sure you know what you are talking about.

The interior structure of the Earth, similar to the outer, is layered. These layers can be defined by either their chemical or their rheological properties. The Earth has an outer silicate solid crust, a highly viscous mantle, a liquid outer core that is much less viscous than the mantle, and a solid inner core.

I was aware I was naming different layers, I don't even get why you said that to me. You make no sense.
edit on 9-5-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 09:19 AM
My God people the Marianas Trench is only 7 miles deep, that ball is 860 miles CUBED. In goes in 3 directions, it's 3 dimensional. Do out the math CORRECTLY and you'll understand that it's accurate as so many people here have done. Despite the fact that you can do the math properly and figure out that it's accurate, you still try to say it's false because it "looks too small" blah blah. It's a 2D picture trying to render a 3D object, of course it looks off in our perceptions. As far as the "70% of earth is water"... Again you're making assumptions based on your perceptions. The fact is "70% of earth is covered in water" is not the same as "70% of the earth is water". The former is correct, the latter is false. I can say 100% of the surface of a tennis ball is covered in green hair, does that means the entire ball is, in fact, green hair?

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 09:38 AM
This DOES NOT include atmospheric water...which is many times the volume of liquid water on the surface.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 09:53 AM

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Water doesn't make up a huge percentage of the Earth.


posted on May, 9 2012 @ 09:59 AM
I could be wrong I only have a small brain but a ball is a round shape so when looking at the pic and title thread if the ball was 860 miles wide wouldn't it be 860 miles high ? Or am I looking at this completely wrong

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:07 AM
What is the point of these articles anyway? We haven't even been to or seen the true depths of the oceans. For some reason I have to doubt the water layer is that thin; yet another ploy to attempt to control public consciousness.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:07 AM
Awesome,that picture is definitely a keeper.

Wonder if that ball includes all the ice on the earths surface, and perhaps underground ice too?

Either way it's quite shocking, I'd thought it'd be bigger, but when you think about it, yea it definitely makes sense. When you think that even the deepest parts of the ocean are really nothing compare to how many miles deep the earth is underneath it that goes all the way to the core then include the cores mass as well.

Unless you believe in the Hollow earth, definitely seems like a plausible comparison.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:11 AM
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:16 AM

Originally posted by NightFlight
How large would a sphere of crude oil be? Could all the crude deposits be calculated? That would be an interesting ball to see.

I bet when visualized this way the ball would appear incredibly tiny. Although not as tiny as a sphere made of all the gold, or platinum:


posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:17 AM
Sorry - Not buying this one. Who knows the amount of water under the earth? There are seas of water reportedly under the earth as well a ice at both poles. I know that science does not know the depth of the ice through out the earth much less the underground oceans that exist. Not buying into this one.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:18 AM
That picture looks accurate enough for horseshoes and hand-grenades...

To get a perspective, imagine that the earth were the size of a basketball. Now cover that basketball
with one thick coat of latex paint.

All of the planets highest peaks and deepest valleys, from the summit of Mount Everest to the
depths of the Marianas Trench would fit *inside* this one layer of paint...

The earth's diameter is about 7910 miles...
From the depths of the Marianas to the summit of Everest is about 12 miles
The average depth of the world's oceans is about 2/3 mile deep.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:39 AM
Love these ATS members...doesn't take long for the math guys to double check the work. I thought I was decent in math but glad to see alot of smart people here. Even if there were two- four of these balls it's still pretty amazing model.

Sorry first post!

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:47 AM
if they are just meaning fresh water I could believe it....also im not sure that picture does justice for 860 miles wide...i think it would need to be slightly bigger or maybe its just the angle.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:51 AM
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein

You are so full of yourself. Stop thinking the government is lying to us about every single thing. This doesn't even have anything to do with them.

We know the mass of the Earth due to the gravitational forces with the moon and Sun. We also put a weight scale on the south pole and flipped it upside down and the numbers were fairly similar.

And it isn't difficult to find the approximate amount of water on the Earth. Find the average depth and surface area of the Earth.

With your type of "logical" that disprove these facts, the idea that there are 100 stars for every grain of sand on all the beaches of the Earth must also be false. "Hmm just too difficult to wrap my head around."

Go put your tin foil hat on and climb back into your closet.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:53 AM
If you actually look at the FRESH water on Earth, it's only about 3% of the total water.

It's also a never changing, finite amount. The ball would be MUCH smaller if it only included FRESH water.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:54 AM
reply to post by Only1King

Yes we have been to the Ocean's depths.

We haven't explored much of the Ocean, but we've been to the deepest parts.

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:57 AM
So all that radiation spewing from Japan will just become dispersed by the oceans huh?

Nothing to worry about?
edit on 9-5-2012 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:03 AM

Originally posted by Xterrain
This DOES NOT include atmospheric water...which is many times the volume of liquid water on the surface.

Yes it does include atmospheric water. No, there is not more atmospheric water than liquid water:

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in