>
>My question is an academic exercise, based on a hypothesis by one of those brave men willing to stick their necks out:
>
>Given that water expands when it freezes, and that the majority of an iceberg is below the surface, wouldn't it therefore follow that the melting of the iceberg would result in its constituent water taking up less volume? Therefore, wouldn't the sea levels actually fall?
>
I believe you are correct. The whole global warming argument, IMHO, is being pushed by the scientific community for the purpose of driving their studies. Funding is what it's all about. This is why it was global cooling in the 70's and now it's global warming. The real problem they should be tackling is the affects of dihydrous monoxide (DHMO) on the earth. Bush's administration has deemed it safe, yet it is wreaking havoc on our planet. It's being used by all of the fortune 500 corporations in America. It's the most destructive thing known to man. It has killed thousands of people, yet no one has done anything about it.