Don Bruder <dakidd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> goldfarb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(David Goldfarb) wrote:
>> >Drop 'em in the oceans, and coastal lowlands get washed away by
massive
>> >tsunamis, but inland/higher elevation areas areas see little (if
>> >anything) more than a short-term increase in precipitation.
>>
>> Nope. Dropping them in the oceans is worse, climate-wise, than
dropping
>> them on land. A lot worse. See, for instance, the article "Giant
>> Meteor Impact" in the March 1966 issue of _Analog_.
>>
>> (You get water va**** instead of dust, yes...but you get *a lot more*
>> water va**** than you would dust.)
>
>Well, yeah, lotsa water va****...
>
>Seems pretty counterintuitive that a significant amount of it could
>remain aloft (and therefore, a problem) for more than a short time,
>though. I'd expect that, local to the drop point, the air would go
>pretty close to supersaturated, and the vast majority of the water would
>almost immediately rain out without carrying very far (comparatively
>speaking) from the point of impact. Especially if local sun-blocking
>effects from the cloud created were to cause a temperature drop in the
>area - Even quicker condensation and rain-out would be my expectation
then.
The va**** itself isn't so much the immediate problem, as the -heat-
content.
Dropping them in the oceans spreads the heat of impact fairly effectively
over the whole world ... which canna take the strain, cap'm. Dropping them
on land melts a spot or two, and a couple hundred miles away a little
while
later you just see a glow on the horizon. If I understand the problem
correctly
of course.
Later on the condensed va**** makes clouds. Lots of clouds.
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from dbd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"It's not the pot that grows the
flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone
to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET
VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/
- net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all
CAPS! --K.
|
