Forums of the Megaverse®

I've looked at web sites that add water to the world (http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/) and I'm coming up with a completely different picture of the world. The site i found can add up to 60m (196.85ft) of water to the earth and the maps still look completely different. I was hoping I could use the site to come up with locations for coastal adventures.

Even factoring in Atlantis would the water level really have risen higher than 60m? You guys be the judge, look at the site then a rifts earth map. Maybe I'm missing something completely obvious but I'm too stupid to realize it.

Consider also that some Rifts may have resulted in the addition of large amounts of water... and I think adding Atlantis would account for a pretty massive amount of sea level rise. It's not like it floats on top of the ocean... you're displacing cubic miles of ocean with land.

I didn't think about rifts releasing water into the earth's oceans

Also consider a lot of major continental coast lines are along fault continental plate zones. When the world went crazy its really hard to say what the coasts would look like as they were smashed flat by tsunamis of epic proportions and then ripped across by numerous unprecedented strength earth quakes. A lot of the worst of that effect would be the pacific rim but the atlantic would not be immune to this either combined with atlantis raising and other side effects of rifts its really hard to say.

Pretty much if it was along a coast line its probably wiped clean away like it never existed.

For simplicity's sake, let's say Atlantis has a rough area at sea level of 250,000 square miles (assumes it is roughly 500 miles along the east coast, 1000 miles along the central axis, and roughly triangular; this is a guesstimate from glancing at a map I found online). Average depth of the ocean is 2.3 miles (according to NOAA)

This means that putting a new continent in the middle of the Atlantic would displace 575,000 cubic miles of seawater. The surface area of the oceans is about 225,000,000 square miles, and of the Earth is about 317,000,000, meaning the volume displaced by our vague representation of Atlantis would increase the oceans about 9-13 feet*, without adding melted sea ice.

*9 feet is 575000mi^3 divided over 317000000 sq miles; 13 feet is 575000mi^3 over 225000000. My math is fuzzy and probably wrong, but throwing a new continent in is going to REALLY screw up the coastline.

While Rifts can be used to bring water and materials in, they can also do the opposite, so some of the water may have been "displaced" extra-dimensionally.

Mark Hall wrote:For simplicity's sake, let's say Atlantis has a rough area at sea level of 250,000 square miles (assumes it is roughly 500 miles along the east coast, 1000 miles along the central axis, and roughly triangular; this is a guesstimate from glancing at a map I found online). Average depth of the ocean is 2.3 miles (according to NOAA)

This means that putting a new continent in the middle of the Atlantic would displace 575,000 cubic miles of seawater. The surface area of the oceans is about 225,000,000 square miles, and of the Earth is about 317,000,000, meaning the volume displaced by our vague representation of Atlantis would increase the oceans about 9-13 feet*, without adding melted sea ice.

*9 feet is 575000mi^3 divided over 317000000 sq miles; 13 feet is 575000mi^3 over 225000000. My math is fuzzy and probably wrong, but throwing a new continent in is going to REALLY screw up the coastline.

Mark according to WB2 Atlantis pg19 the "Land Area of the entire Continent of Atlantis: 2,789,600 square miles (7,225,000 sq. km), about 7% smaller than the United States of America." At a quick glance of the text there is no dimensions of the island easily noticeable (at least as part of the Regional Data bloc, located elsewhere is a possibly I just don't know where w/o an exhaustive search of my Rifts collection). At 2.3mile average depth it would be ~6.4million cubic miles of sea water.

The amount of water based on the books would put your calculations off by a factor of approx. 11 unless a portion of the water displaced when Atlantis popped in traded places w/it..

Ah, I figured my numbers were off. I eyeballed Atlantis on a map I found online. That puts the depth at 107-150 foot ocean rise.

Mark Hall wrote:Ah, I figured my numbers were off. I eyeballed Atlantis on a map I found online. That puts the depth at 107-150 foot ocean rise.

well, it's also rather improbable that atlantis just sorta goes out to the coast line and then is a cliff going straight downward, with no continental shelf of any sort around it

so, bump it up just a bit

well, it's also rather improbable that Atlantis just sorta goes out to the coast line and then is a cliff going straight downward, with no continental shelf of any sort around it

I think it might actually might just stop at the coastline. If the magic levels of the earth were to drop back to before the cataclysm happened the whole continent would disappear.

it varies depending on coastline. and remember that we have the example of the landmass lifting o above the new sealevel (Madhaven/new york is now a pennisula, not an island for example), D-shifting (a bunch of places on the east coast), and just plain unexplained changes (the rocky mountains are not the same mountains they were pre-cataclysm)

not to mention that 6+ feet of ash and all the other side effects of those volcano's, and the massive tidal waves, would likely have altered the fine details of even the parts that didn't see other changes.

The Grand Poobah wrote:I've looked at web sites that add water to the world (http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/) and I'm coming up with a completely different picture of the world. The site i found can add up to 60m (196.85ft) of water to the earth and the maps still look completely different. I was hoping I could use the site to come up with locations for coastal adventures.

Even factoring in Atlantis would the water level really have risen higher than 60m? You guys be the judge, look at the site then a rifts earth map. Maybe I'm missing something completely obvious but I'm too stupid to realize it.

It's also possible the insane weather of the apocalypse (Catagory 9 hurricanes! which arn't even a thing) could have resulted in some kind of heat wave that melted a good chunk of the polar caps.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

The Grand Poobah wrote:I've looked at web sites that add water to the world (http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/) and I'm coming up with a completely different picture of the world. The site i found can add up to 60m (196.85ft) of water to the earth and the maps still look completely different. I was hoping I could use the site to come up with locations for coastal adventures.

Even factoring in Atlantis would the water level really have risen higher than 60m? You guys be the judge, look at the site then a rifts earth map. Maybe I'm missing something completely obvious but I'm too stupid to realize it.

It's also possible the insane weather of the apocalypse (Catagory 9 hurricanes! which arn't even a thing) could have resulted in some kind of heat wave that melted a good chunk of the polar caps.

WB5, Rifts Canada and warlords of russia disagree. in fact the planets response to the catalysm was a 80 year Mini-ice age, and even in PA104-PA109 the weather described is close to the 1800's than the future as predicted by global warming.

so if anything the ice caps ought to be even bigger and thicker.

I wish you could find one true answer in the Rifts books. There are too many books that contradict each other and even in the newer books they never clear anything up.

The Grand Poobah wrote:I've looked at web sites that add water to the world (http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/) and I'm coming up with a completely different picture of the world. The site i found can add up to 60m (196.85ft) of water to the earth and the maps still look completely different. I was hoping I could use the site to come up with locations for coastal adventures.

Even factoring in Atlantis would the water level really have risen higher than 60m? You guys be the judge, look at the site then a rifts earth map. Maybe I'm missing something completely obvious but I'm too stupid to realize it.

The main factor is that it is probable that the maps were drawn by someone, without a geology background and without computers, approximating what they thought the coastline would look like with a significant sea level rise. And now that we have computers that can show what would actually happen, we are still stuck with the original maps.

Fun Note: With 50 Meters of SeaLevel rise Palm Springs CA will become a sea side town.

Shark_Force wrote:

Mark Hall wrote:Ah, I figured my numbers were off. I eyeballed Atlantis on a map I found online. That puts the depth at 107-150 foot ocean rise.

well, it's also rather improbable that atlantis just sorta goes out to the coast line and then is a cliff going straight downward, with no continental shelf of any sort around it

so, bump it up just a bit

I used average ocean depth from NOAA, which would, presumably, include other coastal shelves... but also include Challenger Deep. For our purposes, I think it's enough.

glitterboy2098 wrote:it varies depending on coastline. and remember that we have the example of the landmass lifting o above the new sealevel (Madhaven/new york is now a pennisula, not an island for example), D-shifting (a bunch of places on the east coast), and just plain unexplained changes (the rocky mountains are not the same mountains they were pre-cataclysm)

not to mention that 6+ feet of ash and all the other side effects of those volcano's, and the massive tidal waves, would likely have altered the fine details of even the parts that didn't see other changes.

Considering the levels of D-Shifting.......
...it is possible that the 'Earth' is not even the same 'Earth'....
...that it is a D-shifted amalgamation of multiple different Earths. A piece from here, a piece from there....who would notice?
This would also neatly explain stuff like how the histories of different regions seem off....they are. Because they are the local history....from that bit of Earths history. It was more or less the same as the others, usually, but not always the same. Thus you can have mountains move but still be the same mountain. You can have a city migrate. You can change a continents shape, or alter continental shelves.....literal world building.

eliakon wrote:Considering the levels of D-Shifting.......
...it is possible that the 'Earth' is not even the same 'Earth'....
...that it is a D-shifted amalgamation of multiple different Earths. A piece from here, a piece from there....who would notice?
This would also neatly explain stuff like how the histories of different regions seem off....they are. Because they are the local history....from that bit of Earths history. It was more or less the same as the others, usually, but not always the same. Thus you can have mountains move but still be the same mountain. You can have a city migrate. You can change a continents shape, or alter continental shelves.....literal world building.

Now this is something that I actually never even thought about

eliakon wrote:

glitterboy2098 wrote:it varies depending on coastline. and remember that we have the example of the landmass lifting o above the new sealevel (Madhaven/new york is now a pennisula, not an island for example), D-shifting (a bunch of places on the east coast), and just plain unexplained changes (the rocky mountains are not the same mountains they were pre-cataclysm)

not to mention that 6+ feet of ash and all the other side effects of those volcano's, and the massive tidal waves, would likely have altered the fine details of even the parts that didn't see other changes.

Considering the levels of D-Shifting.......
...it is possible that the 'Earth' is not even the same 'Earth'....
...that it is a D-shifted amalgamation of multiple different Earths. A piece from here, a piece from there....who would notice?
This would also neatly explain stuff like how the histories of different regions seem off....they are. Because they are the local history....from that bit of Earths history. It was more or less the same as the others, usually, but not always the same. Thus you can have mountains move but still be the same mountain. You can have a city migrate. You can change a continents shape, or alter continental shelves.....literal world building.

I'm not sure there's any explination that would violate occams razor harder though.

Considering how histories of different regions don't always agree with each-other even today due to longstanding disputes on history, there's no reason to suggest there needs to be multiple earths for different regions to have multiple histories, it just means not everyone agrees with what happened or when. you know, like people dispute historical facts in real life

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

eliakon wrote:

glitterboy2098 wrote:it varies depending on coastline. and remember that we have the example of the landmass lifting o above the new sealevel (Madhaven/new york is now a pennisula, not an island for example), D-shifting (a bunch of places on the east coast), and just plain unexplained changes (the rocky mountains are not the same mountains they were pre-cataclysm)

not to mention that 6+ feet of ash and all the other side effects of those volcano's, and the massive tidal waves, would likely have altered the fine details of even the parts that didn't see other changes.

Considering the levels of D-Shifting.......
...it is possible that the 'Earth' is not even the same 'Earth'....
...that it is a D-shifted amalgamation of multiple different Earths. A piece from here, a piece from there....who would notice?
This would also neatly explain stuff like how the histories of different regions seem off....they are. Because they are the local history....from that bit of Earths history. It was more or less the same as the others, usually, but not always the same. Thus you can have mountains move but still be the same mountain. You can have a city migrate. You can change a continents shape, or alter continental shelves.....literal world building.

I'm not sure there's any explination that would violate occams razor harder though.

BAH! Occam's razor is a mere SDC blade! Mega Damage or go home

Nekira Sudacne wrote:Considering how histories of different regions don't always agree with each-other even today due to longstanding disputes on history, there's no reason to suggest there needs to be multiple earths for different regions to have multiple histories, it just means not everyone agrees with what happened or when. you know, like people dispute historical facts in real life

Which works great....when the histories are presented as 'this is said' and 'people say' it works a LOT less well when it is presented in the third person omniscient as exposition explaining what is.
And yes, I am fully aware that it simply is trying to justify the mess after the fact...but my position is"'well these are the facts on the ground, how can I make the best out of the situation we have regardless of what we might want" since what I would want would be a single cohesive backstory for the world that is consistent through all the books. But we don't have that, we have the current hodge-podge mess....
But this at least would allow for basically a semi-reboot....figure out what came from where, and then make sure that all following histories for each region match up with their region at least.
(and yes, this would still require creating a sort of 'Rifts Bible' for authors with some sort of canonical timelines, histories, and other This Is What Is stuff)

Now a Rifts Bible is a brilliant idea. Would there be rifts hymns in it though? I love a good song

The Grand Poobah wrote:I wish you could find one true answer in the Rifts books. There are too many books that contradict each other and even in the newer books they never clear anything up.

Well in books based on a world being plagued and decimated by dimensional anomalies, every major natural disaster you can imagine(repeatedly) contradiction seems to be a pretty accurate description of the setting. Just to many variables when you have literally rips in reality leading to and from other dimensions to really make any educated guesses.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

The Grand Poobah wrote:I've looked at web sites that add water to the world (http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/) and I'm coming up with a completely different picture of the world.

The main factor is that it is probable that the maps were drawn by someone, without a geology background and without computers, approximating what they thought the coastline would look like with a significant sea level rise. And now that we have computers that can show what would actually happen, we are still stuck with the original maps.

OOC, this is the main reason for foolishness like the map of Australia. It had a great inland sea at one point, but it ran north and south through the middle of the island and inward from the west coast.

There are some well-considered in-world issues that have shown up in some of the books, though, as detailed in posts to this thread in the Q & A forum. The short answer is that the oceans hit about 150' high before falling to their current levels with the mini ice age.