ForumsWEPRNo more deserts

42 8740
Somewhat49
offline
Somewhat49
1,606 posts
Nomad

I couldn't decide on which place to put this in (tavern, WEPRE) so I put it here hoping I would get well thought out answers and debates among each other.
My question is, if you could turn all the deserts into basicly seas(so putting water ontop of the sand), do you think it would be benificial?

  • 42 Replies
Somewhat49
offline
Somewhat49
1,606 posts
Nomad

Then where would the water come from?

It just comes, this is purley a scenario, not something I am planning on proposing to the government.
Jefferysinspiration
offline
Jefferysinspiration
3,139 posts
Farmer

I'd rather turn it into, you know, land where a heavy percentage of life can use it and not just the desert resistant organisms, or reversing the damage caused to it. This is also essentially a more, err, simpler plan than putting water on top of sand


This ^

It's surely better to create a more live-able space, give the people who live there a better way of life.

However, a lot of people have lived or do live in the desert out of choice. For example the desert fathers.

Now i learn a lot about the desert fathers, and i don't think they would have such a highly significant place in religion if they were the "Restructured and modernized old barren land fathers".
Armed_Blade
offline
Armed_Blade
1,482 posts
Shepherd

All of you are talking about how this would kill the people living in the deserts.

But in reality, you would be killing tens of millions of people.
Just taking account Africa and Antarctica, the Ocean has the potential to kill anyone living on low lying Seaboards. [Eastern China, Coasts of India, Bangladesh, Manhattan] -- Extremely densely populated regions. Sound fun?

Now on top of that, add on the entire landmass of the Sahara, Kalahari, parts of Arizona, the center of Australia, that Desert in Mongolia, and all other deserts -- and chances are we would flood every country's coast, at least somewhere.

Furthermore, coastal areas are good not only for urban developments, but those a little further in from the coast are good for farming. Turning those into beaches would screw with the food output.

In truth, Deserts don't really do anything. Aside from supporting different forms of life, they don't have any control over our global climate.

Turning them into water is not the answer though, that would screw things up. Water does have an effect on climate.

Also, this would not change the fact that the area where the desert used to be will have little rainfall.

Desertification happens with Humans because we accelerate it by cutting down trees, putting fires out, and if you agree with the concept, Global warming. It will still happen though. [IE: The Sahara is growing. If it turned into water, SubSaharan Africa would still continue to desertify. Unless it flooded, of course]

thebluerabbit
online
thebluerabbit
5,340 posts
Farmer

that question is so random... the world NEEDS balance to survive. im not sure how the desert is essential but it is. everything in the ecosystem is essential. it wouldnt exist if it would hurt the earth. and even if more species can live in the water youd still kill all those who live in the desert causing many animals to go extinct. if that place would be an ocean more water would turn into gass and more rain would hit places that already have TOO much water. besides, the problem with the places that are close or inside the desert isnt not having water, its not having DRINKABLE water (i know i live here). and what kind of person would just wander to the desert and get lost? and even if that would happen, if you know where that guy came from there arent any currents that can take him to other places and its easier to calculate his location and find him. id rather get lost in the desert then in the ocean.

i have a better idea: lets destroy all lands on earth and make a single island so we could have more fish :3

no really, humans ALREADY change the earth too much (stupididly). the next step you said is just overly stupid (and i know you didnt say humans but i doubt something like this will just happen on its own)

adrian12345876
offline
adrian12345876
14 posts
Nomad

I think i would be a bad idea if the water were to go through all the deserts because people (as said before) do live there and that specific area has a climate of its own. If you were to replace all the sand with water imagine the crazy weather you would have for the surrounding areas.

thebluerabbit
online
thebluerabbit
5,340 posts
Farmer

yes i just realized that. i talked about the weather thinking about long time terms. but hey its a HOT DESERT. water there would turn into gass so quickly and if all hot deserts would sudently be oceans it wouldnt surprise me if it would be raining all the time on the entire earth.

Somewhat49
offline
Somewhat49
1,606 posts
Nomad

Also, this would not change the fact that the area where the desert used to be will have little rainfall.

Wouldn't the water evaporate into the sky? That water won't just sit there while the sun is up.
it wouldnt exist if it would hurt the earth.

If you wanna say that, look at the topic "wold the earth be better off without humans".
and what kind of person would just wander to the desert and get lost?

I've heard of people having their car breaking down and them dying because of it
the problem with the places that are close or inside the desert isnt not having water, its not having DRINKABLE water (i know i live here).

since the water just get's dumped their, it's pure water, and therefore drinkable, it would be cleaner than tap.
if you know where that guy came from

The problem the people wo die in the desert have, is that there is no one to help them and they weren't expecting their car to break on them.
i have a better idea: lets destroy all lands on earth and make a single island so we could have more fish :3

Too much population, unless you wanna make a waterworld.
the next step you said is just overly stupid (and i know you didnt say humans but i doubt something like this will just happen on its own)

Ok what I mean is a sandbox type thing, where the water is just placed there, no questions asked, it's just there, it's not supposed to be a bill that has to be passed through the politicians around the world to flood the deserts.
Nature can sustain itself, tampering even a little with it would mean DEATH. This is on a huge scale. In short, a stupid idea.

We did screw with gysers, and nothing happened, so why not this? You say it means death, but would it? It actualy could mean alot of flooding, so in that case it may mean death.
If you were to replace all the sand with water imagine the crazy weather you would have for the surrounding areas.

It's not sand for water (although that would be interesting) it's just water ontop of the sand, like in an ocean.
water there would turn into gass so quickly and if all hot deserts would sudently be oceans it wouldnt surprise me if it would be raining all the time on the entire earth.

Now that's an entertaining thought, it would definatley call for quick building of higher ground buildings, water resistant materials, boat in every home incase it really gets bad, mudslides constantly. Also huricanes will be godly since they grow from water and the water would almost be everywhere.
dair5
offline
dair5
3,371 posts
Shepherd

Also in places where it's often below zero and a desert the water would fall, then freeze. Depending on the amount. It would be bad in a lot of ways. If it wasn't a lot of water it would freeze animals to the ice and they would most likly die. It would also freeze holes made in the ice and many lepard seals and polar bears would die. If there was a lot of waer that stayed there and didn't freeze, then the penguins and bears would still most likly die out. Because they need dry ground. For their babies and because they can't swim forever. Without them our ecosystem will change drasticly.

Somewhat49
offline
Somewhat49
1,606 posts
Nomad

Also in places where it's often below zero and a desert the water would fall, then freeze. Depending on the amount. It would be bad in a lot of ways. If it wasn't a lot of water it would freeze animals to the ice and they would most likly die. It would also freeze holes made in the ice and many lepard seals and polar bears would die. If there was a lot of waer that stayed there and didn't freeze, then the penguins and bears would still most likly die out. Because they need dry ground. For their babies and because they can't swim forever. Without them our ecosystem will change drasticly.

But dosen't that water already touch the ice? does that freeze? But I agree with the second part, but isn't their high up places for them to go?
dair5
offline
dair5
3,371 posts
Shepherd

The first part was about the water apperaring, which would be different then the ocean. It'll depend on how much and in what area though. If there's a lot of water it will be hard to freeze. And there's hig places for them to go but their eggs won't make it. And their young chicks won't make it either. Then they're the whole problem with food. If the fishes move up in thw water then the penguins will get them. But since they're food is already down there I doubt they will. That would mean the penguins would have to dive much deeper then normal to get food and most if not all would die trying. And the polar bears would need to find a high place soon. Because they also can't swim foever. It would kill animals though. If it like just rained in huge amounts from out of nowhere.

Somewhat49
offline
Somewhat49
1,606 posts
Nomad

The first part was about the water apperaring, which would be different then the ocean. It'll depend on how much and in what area though. If there's a lot of water it will be hard to freeze. And there's high places for them to go but their eggs won't make it. And their young chicks won't make it either. Then there's the whole problem with food. If the fishes move up in the water then the penguins will get them. But since they're food is already down there I doubt they will. That would mean the penguins would have to dive much deeper then normal to get food and most, if not all would die trying. And the polar bears would need to find a high place soon. Because they also can't swim forever. It would kill animals though. If it like just rained in huge amounts from out of nowhere.

So what your saying is it will eventualy kill off all the animals in snow deserts, I think it will also, mostly from the extream amount of water and the flooding of what used to be landmass, if there was alot of water though, wouldn't it just refreeze over and be the new ice/land?
dair5
offline
dair5
3,371 posts
Shepherd

I'm saying it will have a big impact on the frozen deserts. And those things affect the rest of the world. Also a huge amount of water will not easily freeze. And the earth isn't really getting any colder. It might freeze. And if it does it will take a while. But if it does then that would be a really big problem for those animals. How would you get your fish through 100 feet of ice. Or your seals. And then the orcas and seals would need to move away so they could find a easier place to resurface. And it's bad overall for the delicate ecosystem we have.

Somewhat49
offline
Somewhat49
1,606 posts
Nomad

I'm saying it will have a big impact on the frozen deserts. And those things affect the rest of the world. Also a huge amount of water will not easily freeze. And the earth isn't really getting any colder. It might freeze. And if it does it will take a while. But if it does then that would be a really big problem for those animals. How would you get your fish through 100 feet of ice. Or your seals. And then the orcas and seals would need to move away so they could find a easier place to resurface. And it's bad overall for the delicate ecosystem we have.

Im saying that it would become the new top, like the old one that got covered in water, how did that top freeze? was it 100 feet of ice? I'm assuming it wasn't and thats my point, that it'l just freeze over agian, but I don't know what will happen to the old top.
dair5
offline
dair5
3,371 posts
Shepherd

Im saying that it would become the new top, like the old one that got covered in water, how did that top freeze? was it 100 feet of ice? I'm assuming it wasn't and thats my point, that it'l just freeze over agian, but I don't know what will happen to the old top.


The old top will stay frozen. If the water did freeze then yes there would be a new top but a lot of animals would die.
Somewhat49
offline
Somewhat49
1,606 posts
Nomad

The old top will stay frozen. If the water did freeze then yes there would be a new top but a lot of animals would die.

Yea probably the polar bears would die first, since they are the heaviest and least agile in swimming, it would just be who's the best swimmer if the water just appeared there, I think that there would be animals dieing from the sudden pressure change also and maybe go into shock.
Showing 16-30 of 42