[pale-hands]

> The conditions required for the amount of land-based ice to melt will have meant that the extinction of most (if not all) life on this planet would have occurred long ago.

I very much doubt that you could support this statement. The geological record shows huge variations in sea-level, sometimes much higher than now, without any massive extinction.

> It is simple enough to do the calculations, but I have rarely ever come across anyone (who promulgates the anthropogenic climate change agenda) to do them for themselves.

Please share your calculations with us.

[DennisP]

True. However, the record also shows several mass extinctions in conjunction with warming events similar to what we've got coming in the next century or two, if we don't make major changes fast.

[oldandtired]

I can support it and you have just presented one of the major problems with the catastrophe scenarios predicted by various climate scientists (the geological record - think time-frames here). I have presented the calculations to various climate scientists and other than one "That's interesting, I'll get back to you", there have been no refutations of the calculations by them.

> Please share your calculations with us.

That's the whole point, the calculations can be done by a fifth grader, so I'll let you do your own homework. However, I will give you a clue - conversion involves over 1 million 25 megatonne nuclear bombs. I'll be nice and add, daily global incident solar energy is another clue.

Once you have done your calculations then we can discuss any differences between results and outcomes.

[pale-hands]

This is your claim, right?

> The conditions required for the amount of land-based ice to melt [in order for coastal cities to flood] will have meant that the extinction of most (if not all) life on this planet would have occurred long ago.

I suppose your calculations are simply the energy required to melt the additional volume of water required to raise sea level by x meters, and that the increased rate of heat retention due to AGW could not supply the heat required in y years, for some reasonable values of x and y. I'm prepared to stipulate that that is so. (I would set x=2 to flood some major cities, and y = 2100 - 2017 = 83).

Well, melting all that ice is not the concern, although no doubt it will happen in a few thousand years. The concern is that ice which is currently above sea level will slide into the sea, as the NY Times article discusses. Calculating that would require a whole lot of modelling and detailed knowledge, well beyond a fifth grader (whatever that is in your country), or even a lone genius with superb arithmetical skills.

[flukus]

So the calculations are so simple you won't share them? It sounds like you're worried someone will find a mistake in your simple calculations.

[oldandtired]

Not won't share them, just want you to put in the effort to do them yourself. I am not mummy to tell you how to count on four fingers. If you are so lazy that you cannot take the time to do them for yourself then so be it.

They are simple enough for you to do, so do them and then come back and tell me that I'm wrong. I have given you enough information that, if I am wrong, you will be able to simply refute my end figures by you doing the calculations.

Consider it an exercise in helping you practice appropriate mathematical processes.

I should add that it took me about half an hour to collect the relevant information and do the calculations.

[gasbag]

I have done the calculations, and you are in fact wrong. I'd show you how, but any seventh-grader could find the mistake in 20 minutes, so I'll let you correct your own homework. I'll be nice and add that dimensional analysis is incredibly helpful.