Esoteric Topic - How Much Water Is In the Earth?

[TWHBC]

According to NASA, guess it depends how the question is asked, volume or surface area?

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap120515.html

Guess it depends up if the ball is over you?

WARNING!!!!!
No lever guns or even no guns period, just scientific data.

[Tycer]

Don't pop that bubble!

[Old Ironsights]

Exactly the same amount as there has always been.

The question is how much of it is "free potable water" and how much is out of circulation because it's tied up in human controlled animal tissue (like people & livestock).

[getitdone1]

Hard to believe that 'ball of water' would equal all the water in all the earth, lakes, rivers and oceans on earth.

Very interesting.

Water, sun and soil make food, clothing and shelter possible. Make all living entities possible.

Don

[Old Ironsights]

Of course, a sphere is the smallest possible visible way to express volume too...

Think of it this way: Look at that sphere.

How many Cubic MILES of water are in that sphere.

Remember that ONE cubic mile of sea water contains enough ionic gold to give every human on the planet several ounces of 99% pure gold bullion...

Sometimes (?!!!) images are deceiving...

[AJMD429]

Sometimes (?!!!) images are deceiving...

Especially if they can be (mis)used for political ends...

[jeepnik]

Actually, the volume of water on the earth has changed. When we take hydrocarbon, and combine it with an oxygen and add heat, the resulting combustion results in a net increase in water. So, while it might be argued that the amount of hydrogen atoms and oxygen atoms may have stayed the same (not really, cuz like we are receiving extraterrestrial material, and loosing some terrestrial material to space constantly), they are now combined forming a water molecule.

Oh, and if anyone tells you they can determine the actual volume of water in all of its states, they are blowing smoke.

[Old Ironsights]

Actually, the volume of water on the earth has changed. When we take hydrocarbon, and combine it with an oxygen and add heat, the resulting combustion results in a net increase in water. So, while it might be argued that the amount of hydrogen atoms and oxygen atoms may have stayed the same (not really, cuz like we are receiving extraterrestrial material, and loosing some terrestrial material to space constantly), they are now combined forming a water molecule.

Oh, and if anyone tells you they can determine the actual volume of water in all of its states, they are blowing smoke.

But is the net loss from ionizing reduction less than carbonizing accretion? Probably not enough to make a quantitative difference....

[jeepnik]

Actually, the volume of water on the earth has changed. When we take hydrocarbon, and combine it with an oxygen and add heat, the resulting combustion results in a net increase in water. So, while it might be argued that the amount of hydrogen atoms and oxygen atoms may have stayed the same (not really, cuz like we are receiving extraterrestrial material, and loosing some terrestrial material to space constantly), they are now combined forming a water molecule.

Oh, and if anyone tells you they can determine the actual volume of water in all of its states, they are blowing smoke.

But is the net loss from ionizing reduction less than carbonizing accretion? Probably not enough to make a quantitative difference....

True, but there is a change. It would be interesting if someone were able to figure out how much water we have now, as opposed to a few hundred thousand years ago. But until we get a way back machined and a lot bigger computers...

[pokey]

until we get a way back machine

now you're talking, sign me up.

can i be 25 again , too?

[bdhold]

we're gonna need a really big squirt gun