Am 30.05.2014 02:36, schrieb R Kym Horsell: > In sci.physics kefischer<email@example.com> wrote: > ... >> Why is it taking so long for all >> the melt water to get to the oceans, >> 2 or 3 mm a year is not out of the >> ordinary. > > > Oh, sure. 1-2 mm/yr c1900, 2-3 mm/yr c2000 -- It's starting to compare > favourably to the last time the ice sheets melted. > > www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101201120605.htm > 4 Dec 2010 ... Southampton researchers have estimated that sea-level rose by an average of > about 1 metre per century at the end of the last Ice Age, ... > >
An Atoll is actually remains of corals. These coral are animals, that live in the oceans. They build reefs. Now how come, they happen to be above sea-level?
Well, according to plate-tectonics this comes from lifting of tectonic plates.
Since this is the relativity forum, we may apply the equivalence principle here:
you cannot distinguish falling sea-levels from rising land.
In fact this is not quite true, since it is possible to decide, but you'd need rockets and sophisticated satellites and very precise measurements about a long time.
Now the nice and trustful people of NASA tell, that plate-tectonic is correct and the land is actually lifted out of the ocean.
But we could also compare older remains, that could eventually have been under water, much longer ago than atolls (and NASA exists). E.g. the Alps are sediments too, but of other marine lifeforms than atolls.
Sure, this comes from African plate pushes underneath the European plate and lifting the Alps up. Only: the mediterrenean sea is widening, not pushed together. We see this in matching coastlines and in vulcanoes (like Stromboli).
This means, that theory and observation does not match and this would exclude plate tectonics. Than we could assume, that the alternative modell, called 'Growing Earth' is eventually possible. GE now predicts falling sea-levels (and global warming, btw).