Does this movie imply that global warming not caused by humans
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Waterworld
jesse00 — 11 years ago(November 20, 2014 09:30 PM)
If the conditions shown in Waterworld occurred then it would safe to say all the coal plants etc wouldn't be running etc etc.
I'm no scientist but would that imply that we wouldn't be contributing to any further warming/emissions.
So if emissions dropped to nil then shouldn't global temp go back to the normal/natural.
Seeing as there is no cooling the waterworld conditions are the "natural" conditions - ie the Waterworld conditions not caused by humans.
Just a thought. -
TheLukewarmCereal — 11 years ago(December 16, 2014 01:44 AM)
It's an effect called positive feedback, and it's very bad.
In the impossible scenario presented in this film, the ice caps could be unable to reform due to the poles being flooded. The water temperature could prevent ice from forming because of convection in huge trans-global currents.
One issue would be volcanoes, which would all be pumping a lot of heat into the ocean, which would create huge currents. With no land masses, nothing would stop those currents circling the globe.
But water is also reflective, and doesn't store heat well, so solar thermal energy would be reflected back out to space more. But only one third more than currently, since the earth is already two thirds water. Clouds also play a large role in reflecting solar thermal, but I can't even hazard a guess as to what this sort of environment would do to cloud formation.
It's very complicated. The good news is, though, there isn't enough water on the planet for us to find out what would happen. -
fillshertease — 9 years ago(April 18, 2016 03:51 AM)
Let me start by saying that you are completely correct. I'm not disagreeing with you here and I just want to make that clear. However here are a few things to think about, just for the sake of interesting conversation
- As you say, there simply isn't enough water - currently - to cover all the land on Earth with water. However we don't actually know where all the water on Earth came from. There are theories about it - theories in the everyday sense of the word, not in the scientific sense - and, as such, it's possible that whatever mechanism brought all the water to the Earth could bring more water; enough to cover the entire planet.
- As the ice melted and sea levels started to rise, there would be erosion which could, conceivably, cause a lot of the Earth to disappear into the ocean. So even though scientists predict that if all the ice melted the sea level would rise by about 60-70 metres, that doesn't mean that everything which is currently higher than 60-70 metres above sea level would 'survive'. If you see what I mean?
- Further to point 2 above, we don't know exactly when Waterworld is set. That being the case, we know that continents and tectonic plates are constantly changing and so it is possible that, at some future time in the far future, a lot of the existing mountains and other high above sea level features of the Earth, could be flattened out, thus enabling the entire world to be covered in water.
- In contrast to the above mentioned points, in reality the rising of the sea level around the world would be relatively gradual. This would enable rich countries to build sea walls and other constructions to stave of the rising water levels. Much of the Netherlands is actually below sea level and, as such, they are experts at keeping water out of their cities. They would probably become the richest nation on Earth as everyone started going to them for help with building sea walls!
- Further to point 4, it is very sad that people in the Western World - the people who are mostly causing global climate change and are thus in the strongest position to curtail it - are, for the most part, oblivious to the sea level changes which have been happening for some time now. In some places like Fiji, you can meet villagers who can show you where their village used to be; now underwater. Some of them have had to move their villages more than once! Meanwhile, up in the Arctic, the coastline is receding at a rate of almost 1 metre per year, and that is starting to have devastating consequences for indigenous humans and wildlife. The point being that there are a lot of poor people in the world who had nothing whatsoever to do with the current climate change issue, but who have nonetheless been drastically affected by it. We in the Western World remain oblivious to it though because we live in rich nations who have money to spend on the avoidance of coastal erosion.
Anyway just a few thoughts
We're from the planet Duplon. We are here to destroy you.
-
TheLukewarmCereal — 9 years ago(April 18, 2016 04:20 AM)
Your first point reminds me of a poem.
Heavy rain, the forecast said,
I watched to see it fall.
One gigantic raindrop fell,
and squashed the Albert Hall!
Water of extraterrestrial origin is an interesting concept. It's easy enough to imagine a water ice comet smashing into earth. Of course, if it's big enough to make a substantial difference to the amount of water on the planet, the impact would kill all surface life. -
Balzack — 10 years ago(May 03, 2015 02:26 AM)
The global catastrophe farce of the day back in the 90's was aerosols and ozone layer holes. There was a lot of fear that they would melt the ice caps. Carbon emissions wasn't really factored in too much, but now that's what people concern themselves with. I'm sure in 20 years it'll probably change to something else
-
onerichard — 10 years ago(January 18, 2016 09:59 AM)
in deleted scene/scripts, they had two moons above earth, implying that the global flooding had something to do with gravitational issues.
I also read that even if all the icecaps melted, it would not result in leaving just Mt Everest (the long/lats on Enola's tattoo)
I don't know why I mentioned that hereI just found it interesting.