Steele, OK, I'm all eye's. Please enlighten me on CO and CO2?

Another 'fact' de-bunking CC (or GW), towards proving it a ripoff.
I am forever hearing how the oceans are going to rise up to 60 or 70m.
I have explained why this is a serious overreach or exaggeration.
I have shown that if we took all the ice including glaciers, snow and water in the sky, in other words, take every bit of moisture on earth, melt it, you will not raise the oceans levels by more than a couple of inches.
It is just another way to frighten people into spending money, directly or indirectly.
And all the usual thieves getting their hands on it.

ALTRAV,
I don't remember you showing that. It would be nice if it's true, as that would be one less thing to worry about. but considering you're the only person I've ever heard making that claim (despite many claiming such melting is impossible) I'm very skeptical.

Please repost your assumptions and reasoning!

//OK, I'm all eye's. Please enlighten me on CO and CO2?//

Both colourless and odourless. That's why you take a canary down the mine with you... otherwise you don't know when you've found some until it's too late.

http://www.praxair.com/-/media/documents/sds/carbon-monoxide-co-safety-data-sheet-sds-p4576.pdf?la=en
http://docs.airliquide.com.au/msdsau/AL062.pdf

//I have shown that if we took all the ice including glaciers, snow and water in the sky, in other words, take every bit of moisture on earth, melt it, you will not raise the oceans levels by more than a couple of inches.//

Might we see your working?

Because I did just my own back of the envelope calculation, and it's miles off yours:

The Greenland ice sheet is 2,850,000 cubic kilometres. Source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet

The specific gravity of ice 0.917. Source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_Ih

So melting down the whole ice sheet will yield 2,613,450 cubic kilometres of liquid water. Source:

http://www.calculator.net/

The surface area of the Earth covered by oceans is 360,000,000 square kilometres. Source:

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1997/EricCheng.shtml

2,613,450 cubic kilometres divided by 360,000,000 square kilometres gives a figure of 0.00726 kilometres, which is 7.26 metres. Source:

http://www.calculator.net/

That's a bit more than a few inches, ALTRAV. Now, the 7.26m figure is only approximate - wikipedia says that melting the Greenland ice sheet should raise sea levels by 7.2 metres, a bit lower than my figure. Presumably whoever did that calculation was bit more thorough than me and didn't take short cuts like rounding off the surface area of oceans to nearest 10 million.

But your answer is about by a couple of orders of magnitude, which suggests you've made a miscalculation somewhere. The only way to know will be if you can show your working like I've just done.

Toni, the reason I stand by my figures is because the same assumptions were drawn many years ago and I found flaws in the science back then.
The author had not allowed for submerged ice and treated the snow as being the same as ice.
I have since come to the conclusion that the data is flawed, so I turned to visual maps of the world, and no matter how I looked at it, there was no way I could justify such a horrendous and unrealistic rise in ocean levels.
Another author qualified and corrected himself by saying his figure was at peak or worst case scenario, of tidal rises.
Toni, I can't give you current stats but I ask that you consider the ocean level as a mean level and then calculate everything above it and not below mean level.
I don't expect others to lean my way but knowing what I put together, way back when, obviously I am prepared to put my life and my families life on that proverbial line, I am that sure of my position or numbers.

//Toni, the reason I stand by my figures//

You haven't provided any figures.

//The author had not allowed for submerged ice and treated the snow as being the same as ice.//

I don't know what author your talking about, mate. So I don't know what his work consisted of. Why don't you post a link for us, we cannot read your mind.

However, my work in my previous post was based only on the Greenland ice sheet. There is, of course, a lot more ice out there. Antarctica for a start. The Greenland ice sheet is not submerged ice; it's on Greenland, which is definitely above sea level. And it's not snow; it's ice. The clue is kind of in the name 'ice sheet'. It does get snowed on; but claiming that makes it snow is like claiming that mountains are made of snow.

//I turned to visual maps of the world, and no matter how I looked at it, there was no way I could justify such a horrendous and unrealistic rise in ocean levels.//

That's not maths.

//Toni, I can't give you current stats//

Why not? What's stopping you from reproducing your maths? I linked you to a calculator and everything.

Sorry, mate, but 'I can't show you my sums but trust me, I did them a while ago, and they were spot on' just isn't going to be taken seriously unless you're Pierre de Fermat. And mate, you're no Pierre de Fermat.