4 ms·
if it had melted, then it should cover, not could cover! I'm sure that there's some tidal time lag, but such a significant rise to flood FL in 2", well, I thin
by fattybob 5y ago
if it had melted, then it should cover, not could cover! I'm sure that there's some tidal time lag, but such a significant rise to flood FL in 2", well, I think the evidence would be kinda obvious
- jfengel 5y agoThey're just trying to give you an interpretation of the total volume, which is (1 Florida area) times (2 inches). It would not actually raise the global sea level enough to cover Florida by 2 inches of water, which would indeed be obvious. The description is misleading: why pick Florida? Yes, Florida is a state with more concern than most, but they could just as easily have said that it would cover Rhode Island by 108" of water, or France by half an inch. But then, nobody really has a good feel for units of volume. No matter how you phrase it, it is a lot of water.