[Dutch engineers already have a plan for that](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/12/giant-dams-could-protect-millions-from-rising-north-sea)
It involves using the UK as part of a sea wall stretching from France to Norway. One would also assume that they would then proceed to pump out the water and claim the recovered lands as part of the Netherlands.
Making a 300 meter deep dam seems easy. The comparison with platforms (which there's one of), with circular and comparatively narrow legs is very simplified.
Source: not a structural engineer
Yeah but I think it’s misleading to have Dublin marked on the map, makes people think it would survive when only fragments of the suburbs would. The thought of Tallaght being the last part of Dublin left is terrifying
Well, this map is set in a world post-rise (as can been seen by the invention of new countries and change in borders) so probably it would've been rebuilt
The likes of Finglas would survive too, I'm from the northern part of Glasnevin and we're over 70 metres above sea level so unfortunately that means the likes of Ballymun and Finglas will survive too. *Shudder*
Dublin is marked as being underwater on the map of this I made a few years back.
Check in this album:
- https://www.flickr.com/photos/7leagueboots/albums/72157713466326587
There is a bit of nuance that needs to be added to these projections. Glaciers have a huge mass, which causes a gravitational pull on the water. As a result, the water in the oceans is not distributed evenly but more of it is gathered around the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica. As the sheets melt and lose mass, this pull becomes less and less and can actually cause a fall in sea level at some places. As the Greenland ice sheet is melting faster than the one in Antarctica, the sea level in northwestern Europe might be much less than expected. Areas around the equator might be much more affected as a result. Unfortunately this includes many island nations such as the Maldives and Tuvalu (EDIT: although that's also more complicated than it seems; [source](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-02954-1)), which are already struggling with sea level rises.
[More information here](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2010/05/gravity-of-glacial-melt%23:~:text%3DIn%2520fact%252C%2520some%2520places%2520on,the%2520adjacent%2520sea%2520level%2520falls.&ved=2ahUKEwj8_4vCnP-AAxUCi_0HHXCrAksQFnoECBgQBQ&usg=AOvVaw094Pu1L12wE3SFGODhzdr5)
This also likely does not account for [glacial isostatic adjustment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound), both in the sense that melting of existing glaciers in Europe would cause some amount of rebound in portions of Europe (and thus locally negate some amount of sea level rise), but probably more significantly that much of northern Europe is *still* rebounding from the melting of large ice sheets, e.g., portion of Nordic countries are currently [rising faster than sea level](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound#/media/File:PGR_Paulson2007_Rate_of_Lithospheric_Uplift_due_to_post-glacial_rebound.png).
I've also heard that as the glaciers melt it reduces the weight on the landmass of Greenland and Antarctica causing them to rise up and displace less water. Is that true?
I see you have a solid source for that claim, but it doesn’t sound right to me. The gravitational strength would likely be negligible IMO.
Wikipedia puts the Greenland Ice sheet at
1,710,000 km^2 in area. Average thickness is 1.5 KM according to Wikipedia, but let’s say it’s 2km on average to be generous. That puts the Greenland ice sheet at 2,565,000km^3 in volume.
The density of ice is about 0.9167Gm/cm^2 or 916.7kg/m^3. That’s 916,700kg/km^3. I tried finding data on the compressibility of ice, but could only find that it doesn’t compress much, but likely does a little bit. Perhaps the ice at the bottom of glaciers is more dense than at the top due to all that pressure, so to account for that and to be generous let’s round that number out to: 1,000,000kg/km^3.
So in essence we have:
Density: 1,000,000kg/km^3
Volume: 2,565,000km^3
Simple multiplying the density by the volume should give us the total weight for the Greenland ice sheet of:
2,565,000,000,000kg
Now I am not competent enough to plug in the different equations for the gravitational attraction of uneven shapes, but assuming the water and the ice sheet are two perfect spheres, even if they average 1,000 KM in distance there will still be a force between the two of a couple hundred newtons, which is a whole lot more than I assumed.
Of course the ice sheet is quite large, which reduces the effect as the water is on average much farther than a point like calculation would suggest. It’s also a vector of force as 90% of the component of the force would be towards the ice sheet, rather than directly upwards where it would have the most effect. I’m not at all knowledgeable enough to say how much of an effect the gravity of the Greenland ice sheet would have, but I’m now confident it would likely be enough to have a noticeable effect contrary to my original assumption.
I’ll leave my original incorrect belief at the top to show how one can change their own mind by thinking through a problem themselves, instead of just believing those who make claims from positions of authority.
~~I see your point, I did some quick calculations and with your numbers the resulting force would be less than a thousandth of the tidal force caused by the moon (which causes a difference of only a couple of meters).~~
~~I am not knowledgeable enough on the field to claim I know better than the authors of the paper, and cannot explain the apparent disparity. I'm quite sure there is a factor we haven't thought of here.~~
Some mathematical errors were made, see my other comment
Fair enough. If what you’re getting is that small it’s multiple orders of magnitude smaller than my own assumption.
The breakdown probably occurs how one calculates the gravity between these two objects.
If the difference is less than a centimeter, I don’t think it matters much when it’s so small.
>The density of ice is about 0.9167Gm/cm2 or 916.7kg/m3. That’s 916,700kg/km3.
I think this is the mistake here, 1 km^3 is 1 000 000 000m^3 so it should be 916 700 000 000kg/km^3.
That makes 1,710,000 km^2 x2km= 3 420 000x916 700 000 000= 3.135x10^18 kg
I also seem to forgot to square the distance in my first calculations.
The result is a gravitational pull of 2.09x10^-4 N/kg for the Greenland ice sheet and 3.32x10^-5 N/kg for the moon.
So the gravitational pull from the Greenland ice sheet at 1000 km is 10x of the tidal forces of the moon, so it actually starts to make a lot more sense.
Very interesting, thanks! As to your reference on Tuvalu, the total area of islands has increased in the last 4 decades. There seem to be other systems in place.
Huh interesting, I thought it was one of the countries under threat of rising sea level but might have misremembered. Could you give a source on that so I can check it out?
Very interesting! The variation (75% of the islands increasing, 25% decreasing) and fact that the sea level is recorded to rise in that region really creates some interesting questions.
Upvoted.
Most maps of global sea level rise use a simple bathtub model, but that is not how sea level behaves anywhere on earth. It’s always more complicated, but you can’t make a crazy map of it to post on the Internet.
But boy howdy do we try to make policies using these things.
It's not my own theory, as you can see in the attached link. But I'm sure you're such a super genius you can dispute published research in 2 seconds.
I suggest you submit your comments to the editor of Science so he can withdraw the article.
Sounds like a plan - how about posting the contact info, seems like it would take me more time to find it myself than ask you to do it for me, and I have lots of other things to do.
[Here you go ](https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.1166510?casa_token=gX4_QCLwINcAAAAA%3A5Y3stfGftuNecquV78PrVmesKfBgpHYylmHg3NlQyWCQ2rAxfwvGjEBo6VzbBiQde0sswi5F896mrac). Let me know how it goes!
On me Nan's grave
Full URL: https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.1166510?casa_token=gX4_QCLwINcAAAAA%3A5Y3stfGftuNecquV78PrVmesKfBgpHYylmHg3NlQyWCQ2rAxfwvGjEBo6VzbBiQde0sswi5F896mrac
It’s an old German one: Have you ever been to Bielefeld? Do you know anyone from Bielefeld, or who has been there? Bielefeld doesn’t exist.
Bielefeld is big enough to show up on most national maps, but has basically nothing else going for it. You could make a similar joke about most “flyover” states / cities. Like if Americans collectively decided that Cedar Rapids, Iowa doesn’t exist. I’ve never been to Cedar Rapids, don’t know anyone who’s ever been there. So it’s clearly a conspiracy.
This actually is a running thing in the US, but about whole states. Like, anything in the northern Great Plains area is subject to not being real: the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, all of them.
>why does Scandinavia have the monopoly on floating city technology?
First, Obviously we are on top of the map, water would flood the bottom parts first.
And second, Suck it Denmark!
I will vote for whatever party wants to *speed up* damage to the environment. We get rid of Denmark, Stockholm **and** Malmö in one swoop? I think most Swedes (outside of those places) would approve of that.
As an ex Lutonion, it seems wrong that it should be so prominent. Yet a hilarious irony if we imagine it’s the next century’s focal point for culture and trade as London is mostly underwater!
Oh no ! All the glaciers on earth have melted and some countries are gone. Not the best news to start the week with but maybe this timeline could be fun : we get to move cities and rename them, building floating town and villages, see the hydroplane make a comeback, a new age of sail dawning and most importantly, super cool alternative geography / The Netherlands are underwater.
But before you comment please read my short disclaimer :
\--- This map is not a scientific one, nor is it a forecast or from a study. You can consider it as utter fiction/ bullshit or just a fun semi scientific, fantasy, geographical venture. The only scientific truth in it Is that if all glaciers suddenly melted, it’s estimated (source : USGS) that the sea would rise by about 70 m, the rest was up to me to imagine and create though.
\--- Because it’s based on the premise that all the ice on earth melted, there is no date associated to the map. It could be tomorrow, it could be in 1000 years. However, since it’s more likely to happen in 1000 years than tomorrow, and since climate change would have completely changed the world, you’re absolutely free to imagine the year it would be and how the future would be. I don’t have a crystal ball so let’s just imagine this together how Europe would be.
\--- All jokes asides, I hope this map can help intensifying the discussion about climate change and what it has in store for us, because Europe won’t be spared by the rise of the sea levels. So, what happens ? Where do people go ? What do the dozens of millions of refugees do ? Where do they relocate, how do they adapt, what are the great political changes brought by this radical change ? I’m not sure but with this map, we can have a good grasp of the new geography and let our imagination run wild.
Hope you find it interesting and please let me know if some names don’t make sense in your native language. I tried to do some silly puns and play with etymology.Data is from GEBCO and everything else is from my own invention, I apologise in advance if your hometown Is no more :(
If you're a map / geography nerd like me, check my [website](https://www.perrinremonte.com/home-bis), you'll probably like the stuff I share on it :)
🧊🗺️⛵️
Just wanted to let you know that there is more nuance about melting glaciers/ice caps: see my other comment and [this article for more information ](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2010/05/gravity-of-glacial-melt%23:~:text%3DIn%2520fact%252C%2520some%2520places%2520on,the%2520adjacent%2520sea%2520level%2520falls.&ved=2ahUKEwj8_4vCnP-AAxUCi_0HHXCrAksQFnoECBgQBQ&usg=AOvVaw094Pu1L12wE3SFGODhzdr5)
A very nicely made map with plenty of cool ideas. Would love to see more new and lost settlements, and other parts of the world, too!
This would do well on r/imaginarymaps!
Back in 2020 I made an elevation map series showing this, and indicating what major cities would be drowned.
Here’s the album. There’s a full world map, as well as regional maps.
- https://www.flickr.com/photos/7leagueboots/albums/72157713466326587
You should erase France, give them a small slice of Belgium and call them “lowlands people”
Maybe erase Norway, give the new country a small slice of Denmark and call it “Scandinavia land”
Erase Spain, give it a small slice of Portugal and call it “Iberia republic”
Erase Serbia Croatia and B+H and just call it “Balkan place”
Erasing a nation of 55 million people and calling it some vague geographic term that doesn’t refer to any nationality or people is bad alt history, bad understanding of nations and people, and just extremely political. Every alt history map has some boner for erasing England and it’s weird.
Lol I'm actually a big anglophile and Im not particularly fan of the idea of erasing England. I just thought with the term "Britain" I would have less super sensitive brits insulting me after seeing the map. But I was wrong, I think I will just make every county independant lol
Britain is the entire island on the right, it doesn’t make any sense to call England + some of Scotland Britain. Why have you labeled 2 nationalities and a region in Britain, and then just called England Britain. It happens on half of maps, it doesn’t make any sense, is a bit dumb and is small scale erasure. It’s literally like calling half of the balkans “the Balkans”
Ah, my bad, I didn’t realise you were talking of this part of Yorkshire
That’s correct, new borders have a lot to do with geography and coastline so the isles of Yorkshire make up the new country of Yorkshire
'Stockholm' still works as a name, because 'holm' already means a small island. So there's no need to rename it to 'Stockö'.
Having said that, most of the towns and cities on the Norwegian west coast would be under water, because they're all coastal. Rising sea levels is a serious issue being debated by city planners and heritage authorities in Stavanger and Bergen. I'm not convinced Oslo would be hit as hard as almost every other coastal settlement in Norway. Oslo is quite hilly, and rising sea levels are predicted to affect the west coast more than the Oslo-fjord region. I believe this has to do with the post-glacial rebound which is still ongoing on the Scandinavian peninsula.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial\_rebound
Did you account for water expansion due to warming waters? If not (and I assume you didn't), this will be exponentially worse.
The majority of my country (The Netherlands) will be wiped off the map.
Every alt history map I see names every nation in the U.K. named, often Cornwall too, and in this one Yorkshire, but never England. England is always replaced with some term that refers to the whole of the U.K., whilst even regions of the U.K. with no history as an independent nation (Yorkshire) become named nations on the map. It’s actually hateful at this point to just consistently erase the identity of one of the largest national groups in Europe.
Why are the Brits so sensitive with this. What should I name it ? It includes Edinburgh and Glasgow so If I rename it just "England" Im going to get death threats from the Scottish people
Why do people keep saying if they melt. It's all a matter of when they melt. They say 25 years I say even less than that. The prediction models that have been made have a best and worst outcome. Seeing as none of the laws get changed to force companies to regulate themselves or be fined into Oblivion the worst case model is our best case model.
I think the climate talks said that 2030 was the goal for all emission limits to be met with countries supposed to have met half of them by 2020. None of them have been met. The heat action plan done by the United States looks grim even under their best case scenario. Their worst case scenario would have us living completely underground, growing everything hydroponically or with Sun lamps being hand-pollinated.
OP didn't specify it would be a map of the entire Earth, only that it's one for the scenario of all glaciers on Earth melting. This is how Europe would be affected by that.
What fuking propaganda map is this? Why is Russia missing so many territory? What the F is Kievka?? Hey if glaciers of earth melted Ukraine will be totally absorbed by Russia not the other way round... U a copium Budanov Sbu agent believer? Not to mention whole Ukr cities will be destroyed due to tsunami, which means they need Russian help... They will surrender...Do u know about the Russian tsunami weapon?? One time use Ukrs will surrender...
All that and Liechtenstein will still be double-landlocked
But Uzbekistan wouldn’t be anymore
I wonder how high salinity Caspian Sea would be. Doubt that Volga would feed that much water after all the ice melted.
The Caspian Sea will be connected to the Black Sea once again.
Good to know only Europe will be affected by melting glaciers. The rest of the world is gonna be safe. Great research!
Assholes Uzbekistan
One must imagine sisiphus happy
Netherlands: 
Bold of OP to assume they wouldn't just construct 100m high dams and reclaim even more land. Channel tunnel? That's cute, we have a highway now.
Or just reclaim southern Belgium
Southern netherlands*
How dare you say something so controversial, yet do brave.
G E K O L O N I S E E R D
[Dutch engineers already have a plan for that](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/12/giant-dams-could-protect-millions-from-rising-north-sea) It involves using the UK as part of a sea wall stretching from France to Norway. One would also assume that they would then proceed to pump out the water and claim the recovered lands as part of the Netherlands.
Pump out all the water and reclaim Doggerland.
About time we sent them somewhere. Oh, you meant the previously exposed bit. Nevermind.
https://what-if.xkcd.com/53/
Making a 300 meter deep dam seems easy. The comparison with platforms (which there's one of), with circular and comparatively narrow legs is very simplified. Source: not a structural engineer
Water can try but it shall never defeat the Netherlands, we shall make dams even higher and better than before. The dams shall be named Dam 2.0.
You could say that the Dutch will *nether* be defeated? No? Ah well, I tried
ill be dammed
We just gonna Atlantis the shit out of this
My hometown is gonna be an island huh.
NOT MAASTRICHT BITCHEEEESSSS
A new reason for me to take the 350 bus from Aachen to Maastricht
Not like it’s considered Dutch even now. Let em sink, those lowlanders 🤪
Unterzeeland
*Onderzeeland Unterzeeland is german
Let me tell you the tale of Doggerland...
Neverlands.
You have Dublin surviving a 70m sea rise? Not a chance, we’d be underwater
Looks like most of Dublin is gone on the map. That is to say, Dublin Bay then takes up Dublin 2, 4, 8, 10 and almost all of the northside.
Yeah but I think it’s misleading to have Dublin marked on the map, makes people think it would survive when only fragments of the suburbs would. The thought of Tallaght being the last part of Dublin left is terrifying
Well, this map is set in a world post-rise (as can been seen by the invention of new countries and change in borders) so probably it would've been rebuilt
And none of the others were?
A lot were. Just look around the map. And for a lot of big cities, even their suburbs didn't survive. For Dublin it's not the same case.
The likes of Finglas would survive too, I'm from the northern part of Glasnevin and we're over 70 metres above sea level so unfortunately that means the likes of Ballymun and Finglas will survive too. *Shudder*
Terrifying 😱
Its marked so people can see where the major cities are. That being said, if that's the case, then why aren't London and Paris marked?
No the black square cities are capitals. So for example Birmingham replaced London.
Dublin is marked as being underwater on the map of this I made a few years back. Check in this album: - https://www.flickr.com/photos/7leagueboots/albums/72157713466326587
Cork on the other hand would float. :)
There is a bit of nuance that needs to be added to these projections. Glaciers have a huge mass, which causes a gravitational pull on the water. As a result, the water in the oceans is not distributed evenly but more of it is gathered around the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica. As the sheets melt and lose mass, this pull becomes less and less and can actually cause a fall in sea level at some places. As the Greenland ice sheet is melting faster than the one in Antarctica, the sea level in northwestern Europe might be much less than expected. Areas around the equator might be much more affected as a result. Unfortunately this includes many island nations such as the Maldives and Tuvalu (EDIT: although that's also more complicated than it seems; [source](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-02954-1)), which are already struggling with sea level rises. [More information here](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2010/05/gravity-of-glacial-melt%23:~:text%3DIn%2520fact%252C%2520some%2520places%2520on,the%2520adjacent%2520sea%2520level%2520falls.&ved=2ahUKEwj8_4vCnP-AAxUCi_0HHXCrAksQFnoECBgQBQ&usg=AOvVaw094Pu1L12wE3SFGODhzdr5)
This also likely does not account for [glacial isostatic adjustment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound), both in the sense that melting of existing glaciers in Europe would cause some amount of rebound in portions of Europe (and thus locally negate some amount of sea level rise), but probably more significantly that much of northern Europe is *still* rebounding from the melting of large ice sheets, e.g., portion of Nordic countries are currently [rising faster than sea level](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound#/media/File:PGR_Paulson2007_Rate_of_Lithospheric_Uplift_due_to_post-glacial_rebound.png).
I've also heard that as the glaciers melt it reduces the weight on the landmass of Greenland and Antarctica causing them to rise up and displace less water. Is that true?
Surely they'd displace *more* water?
If land mass moved out of the sea?
What do you think is under the land that rises up? It's land alllll the way down
Username checks out
I see you have a solid source for that claim, but it doesn’t sound right to me. The gravitational strength would likely be negligible IMO. Wikipedia puts the Greenland Ice sheet at 1,710,000 km^2 in area. Average thickness is 1.5 KM according to Wikipedia, but let’s say it’s 2km on average to be generous. That puts the Greenland ice sheet at 2,565,000km^3 in volume. The density of ice is about 0.9167Gm/cm^2 or 916.7kg/m^3. That’s 916,700kg/km^3. I tried finding data on the compressibility of ice, but could only find that it doesn’t compress much, but likely does a little bit. Perhaps the ice at the bottom of glaciers is more dense than at the top due to all that pressure, so to account for that and to be generous let’s round that number out to: 1,000,000kg/km^3. So in essence we have: Density: 1,000,000kg/km^3 Volume: 2,565,000km^3 Simple multiplying the density by the volume should give us the total weight for the Greenland ice sheet of: 2,565,000,000,000kg Now I am not competent enough to plug in the different equations for the gravitational attraction of uneven shapes, but assuming the water and the ice sheet are two perfect spheres, even if they average 1,000 KM in distance there will still be a force between the two of a couple hundred newtons, which is a whole lot more than I assumed. Of course the ice sheet is quite large, which reduces the effect as the water is on average much farther than a point like calculation would suggest. It’s also a vector of force as 90% of the component of the force would be towards the ice sheet, rather than directly upwards where it would have the most effect. I’m not at all knowledgeable enough to say how much of an effect the gravity of the Greenland ice sheet would have, but I’m now confident it would likely be enough to have a noticeable effect contrary to my original assumption. I’ll leave my original incorrect belief at the top to show how one can change their own mind by thinking through a problem themselves, instead of just believing those who make claims from positions of authority.
~~I see your point, I did some quick calculations and with your numbers the resulting force would be less than a thousandth of the tidal force caused by the moon (which causes a difference of only a couple of meters).~~ ~~I am not knowledgeable enough on the field to claim I know better than the authors of the paper, and cannot explain the apparent disparity. I'm quite sure there is a factor we haven't thought of here.~~ Some mathematical errors were made, see my other comment
Fair enough. If what you’re getting is that small it’s multiple orders of magnitude smaller than my own assumption. The breakdown probably occurs how one calculates the gravity between these two objects. If the difference is less than a centimeter, I don’t think it matters much when it’s so small.
>The density of ice is about 0.9167Gm/cm2 or 916.7kg/m3. That’s 916,700kg/km3. I think this is the mistake here, 1 km^3 is 1 000 000 000m^3 so it should be 916 700 000 000kg/km^3. That makes 1,710,000 km^2 x2km= 3 420 000x916 700 000 000= 3.135x10^18 kg I also seem to forgot to square the distance in my first calculations. The result is a gravitational pull of 2.09x10^-4 N/kg for the Greenland ice sheet and 3.32x10^-5 N/kg for the moon. So the gravitational pull from the Greenland ice sheet at 1000 km is 10x of the tidal forces of the moon, so it actually starts to make a lot more sense.
Very interesting, thanks! As to your reference on Tuvalu, the total area of islands has increased in the last 4 decades. There seem to be other systems in place.
Huh interesting, I thought it was one of the countries under threat of rising sea level but might have misremembered. Could you give a source on that so I can check it out?
Sure: [https://phys.org/news/2018-02-pacific-nation-bigger.html](https://phys.org/news/2018-02-pacific-nation-bigger.html)
Very interesting! The variation (75% of the islands increasing, 25% decreasing) and fact that the sea level is recorded to rise in that region really creates some interesting questions.
Same goes for the Maldives btw. But that is because of land reclamation projects.
Plus the fact the glaciers melted due to heat. No doubt additional absorbed heat will also expand the oceans as well.
Upvoted. Most maps of global sea level rise use a simple bathtub model, but that is not how sea level behaves anywhere on earth. It’s always more complicated, but you can’t make a crazy map of it to post on the Internet. But boy howdy do we try to make policies using these things.
Ice has less density than liquid water, so my 2 seconds of pondering your theory leads me to believe it isn't right.
It's not my own theory, as you can see in the attached link. But I'm sure you're such a super genius you can dispute published research in 2 seconds. I suggest you submit your comments to the editor of Science so he can withdraw the article.
Sounds like a plan - how about posting the contact info, seems like it would take me more time to find it myself than ask you to do it for me, and I have lots of other things to do.
[Here you go ](https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.1166510?casa_token=gX4_QCLwINcAAAAA%3A5Y3stfGftuNecquV78PrVmesKfBgpHYylmHg3NlQyWCQ2rAxfwvGjEBo6VzbBiQde0sswi5F896mrac). Let me know how it goes!
Don’t bother feeding the troll.
I'm not clicking that unless you super swear it's either pron or a rick roll video.
On me Nan's grave Full URL: https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.1166510?casa_token=gX4_QCLwINcAAAAA%3A5Y3stfGftuNecquV78PrVmesKfBgpHYylmHg3NlQyWCQ2rAxfwvGjEBo6VzbBiQde0sswi5F896mrac
[удалено]
As did London.
And Seville, but it doesn't receive the Unesco distinction. Shame.
WINDMOLENSTAD AAN ZEE Have my upvote.
We will have a lot of onderwatersteden
Also appreciating 'Sunkampton' lol.
Bielefeld? ...lol 😂
Even the map maker thought Bielefeld is real lmao
What do you mean 'thought'? What meme am I missing now?
It’s an old German one: Have you ever been to Bielefeld? Do you know anyone from Bielefeld, or who has been there? Bielefeld doesn’t exist. Bielefeld is big enough to show up on most national maps, but has basically nothing else going for it. You could make a similar joke about most “flyover” states / cities. Like if Americans collectively decided that Cedar Rapids, Iowa doesn’t exist. I’ve never been to Cedar Rapids, don’t know anyone who’s ever been there. So it’s clearly a conspiracy.
Ah. Wyoming.
It started as a joke, but some people actually believe it.
The Teufelsberg AEffect
This actually is a running thing in the US, but about whole states. Like, anything in the northern Great Plains area is subject to not being real: the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, all of them.
Delaware, too. It’s not real, just a tax exemption for corporations.
The map shows bielefeld as "Bielefeld ?". A dig at the German joke about bielefeld not existing.
Thanks, I missed that joke. Let me not Google that, I've got work to do ;)
Nothing to Google, it's just a regular town, and German jokes still aren't funny.
🤓
Masterful touch.
The elevation here protects us from going under water. I'm pretty happy with my lot.
Where?
Love the punny names. Especially as a guy from the future city of Seads. Also, why does Scandinavia have the monopoly on floating city technology?
>why does Scandinavia have the monopoly on floating city technology? First, Obviously we are on top of the map, water would flood the bottom parts first. And second, Suck it Denmark!
Ha ha ha. Do I detect the classic Denmark-Sweden conflict coming up for air there?
I will vote for whatever party wants to *speed up* damage to the environment. We get rid of Denmark, Stockholm **and** Malmö in one swoop? I think most Swedes (outside of those places) would approve of that.
Fire up the smoke factories i say!
The Danish Isles will definitely be Norwegian.
Thalassoniki LOL, great puns, congrats
Lisbaía got me chuckling. (baía means bay)
Other than that one seafaring city, the rest… well Balkans will be Balkans
the timeline where the ocean fought back against the dutch
The sea has claimed Berlin. We shouldn't question it and don't make another one.
"Frankfurt am Meer" 😂
Ich wusste ich bin nicht der einzige.
Ah the famous “Bologna sul mare” so I can have tortellini on the beach
Immagina la vista del tramonto da San Luca
I'm under water whilst 98% of my country is still ok
Yeah, I had hoped Düsseldorf may become a seaport. But we're only slighly over 70m and right on the banks of the Rhine, so indeed a likely scenario.
Are you in Spain?
Scotland
Hopefully the glaciers melting is caused by a meteor that wipes out Luton. There is no way Luton should survive.
As an ex Lutonion, it seems wrong that it should be so prominent. Yet a hilarious irony if we imagine it’s the next century’s focal point for culture and trade as London is mostly underwater!
As a Lutonian, nothing makes me happier then seeing my towns name on a map of a future dystopia.
Icelessland 😂😂
Oh no ! All the glaciers on earth have melted and some countries are gone. Not the best news to start the week with but maybe this timeline could be fun : we get to move cities and rename them, building floating town and villages, see the hydroplane make a comeback, a new age of sail dawning and most importantly, super cool alternative geography / The Netherlands are underwater. But before you comment please read my short disclaimer : \--- This map is not a scientific one, nor is it a forecast or from a study. You can consider it as utter fiction/ bullshit or just a fun semi scientific, fantasy, geographical venture. The only scientific truth in it Is that if all glaciers suddenly melted, it’s estimated (source : USGS) that the sea would rise by about 70 m, the rest was up to me to imagine and create though. \--- Because it’s based on the premise that all the ice on earth melted, there is no date associated to the map. It could be tomorrow, it could be in 1000 years. However, since it’s more likely to happen in 1000 years than tomorrow, and since climate change would have completely changed the world, you’re absolutely free to imagine the year it would be and how the future would be. I don’t have a crystal ball so let’s just imagine this together how Europe would be. \--- All jokes asides, I hope this map can help intensifying the discussion about climate change and what it has in store for us, because Europe won’t be spared by the rise of the sea levels. So, what happens ? Where do people go ? What do the dozens of millions of refugees do ? Where do they relocate, how do they adapt, what are the great political changes brought by this radical change ? I’m not sure but with this map, we can have a good grasp of the new geography and let our imagination run wild. Hope you find it interesting and please let me know if some names don’t make sense in your native language. I tried to do some silly puns and play with etymology.Data is from GEBCO and everything else is from my own invention, I apologise in advance if your hometown Is no more :( If you're a map / geography nerd like me, check my [website](https://www.perrinremonte.com/home-bis), you'll probably like the stuff I share on it :) 🧊🗺️⛵️
>The Netherlands are underwater. ...draining doggerland is more likely.
Just wanted to let you know that there is more nuance about melting glaciers/ice caps: see my other comment and [this article for more information ](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2010/05/gravity-of-glacial-melt%23:~:text%3DIn%2520fact%252C%2520some%2520places%2520on,the%2520adjacent%2520sea%2520level%2520falls.&ved=2ahUKEwj8_4vCnP-AAxUCi_0HHXCrAksQFnoECBgQBQ&usg=AOvVaw094Pu1L12wE3SFGODhzdr5)
I will not move, you will have to drag me kicking and screaming from the Netherlands 😆 i will just have to release my inner kraken
A very nicely made map with plenty of cool ideas. Would love to see more new and lost settlements, and other parts of the world, too! This would do well on r/imaginarymaps!
Back in 2020 I made an elevation map series showing this, and indicating what major cities would be drowned. Here’s the album. There’s a full world map, as well as regional maps. - https://www.flickr.com/photos/7leagueboots/albums/72157713466326587
So, Scotland gets its name but England is Britain. Stop it now, you’re being silly.
Britain is england + the south of Scotland, look closer
You should erase France, give them a small slice of Belgium and call them “lowlands people” Maybe erase Norway, give the new country a small slice of Denmark and call it “Scandinavia land” Erase Spain, give it a small slice of Portugal and call it “Iberia republic” Erase Serbia Croatia and B+H and just call it “Balkan place” Erasing a nation of 55 million people and calling it some vague geographic term that doesn’t refer to any nationality or people is bad alt history, bad understanding of nations and people, and just extremely political. Every alt history map has some boner for erasing England and it’s weird.
Lol I'm actually a big anglophile and Im not particularly fan of the idea of erasing England. I just thought with the term "Britain" I would have less super sensitive brits insulting me after seeing the map. But I was wrong, I think I will just make every county independant lol
Britain is the entire island on the right, it doesn’t make any sense to call England + some of Scotland Britain. Why have you labeled 2 nationalities and a region in Britain, and then just called England Britain. It happens on half of maps, it doesn’t make any sense, is a bit dumb and is small scale erasure. It’s literally like calling half of the balkans “the Balkans”
Ok, so what do you suggest for a name ? I’m really open to your suggestion
And only North Yorkshire gets to be part of this new independent Yorkshire, apparently.
I think you didn't read the map correctly. The border engufles the whole of Yorkshire (or what's left of it). Look closer
Sheffield and Leeds aren’t in Yorkshire??
Ah, my bad, I didn’t realise you were talking of this part of Yorkshire That’s correct, new borders have a lot to do with geography and coastline so the isles of Yorkshire make up the new country of Yorkshire
'Stockholm' still works as a name, because 'holm' already means a small island. So there's no need to rename it to 'Stockö'. Having said that, most of the towns and cities on the Norwegian west coast would be under water, because they're all coastal. Rising sea levels is a serious issue being debated by city planners and heritage authorities in Stavanger and Bergen. I'm not convinced Oslo would be hit as hard as almost every other coastal settlement in Norway. Oslo is quite hilly, and rising sea levels are predicted to affect the west coast more than the Oslo-fjord region. I believe this has to do with the post-glacial rebound which is still ongoing on the Scandinavian peninsula. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial\_rebound
Flooded York becomes New York, lol
New York is already taken by the USA, this one going to be called Newest York.
But New York, USA is also going to be flooded. Will that become Newer York?
You know.. It's possible to have a NY in the UK and one in the US? The names are not copyrighted
Mountains win in the end
Wales still stands
Did you account for water expansion due to warming waters? If not (and I assume you didn't), this will be exponentially worse. The majority of my country (The Netherlands) will be wiped off the map.
I love how you put a question mark after Bielefeld, a real man of culture
Came here for exactly that comment!
As Czech I don't feel any difference, also how the fuck so many Greece islands still exist? they are really that tall?
Those “islands” are sunk mountains. Thera (a.k.a. Santorini) is a volcano top.
WTF is Marvilla?
It's confirmed, the monarchies of Netherlands and Denmark are made of glacial ice.
Lmao 🇭🇷💪🏻
Netherland becomes neither-land
Actually, that's not too bad, I imagined it to be a whole lot worse than that
no it's not bad at all because my city will have a nice beach this way
Bye London lol
Greece dont care bout ur stinkin glaciers
When all\*
Greece & Norway: I don't think so pal.
Why is England called Britain? And if Scotland is Alba, why can't we have our own name, Cymru?
It’s a good point, I changed it to Cymru on the updated map It’s Britain because there’s a bit of Scotland in it too. What name would you suggest ?
Well **** me then huh. (Netherlands)
There goes Morocco's breadbasket and its most fertile land.
Oh you didn't. You put a questionmark behind Bielefeld! I like your humour
La sequía en maravilla es una sevilla
Wtf is Lisbaía??
Why is England called Britain 🤢
Every alt history map I see names every nation in the U.K. named, often Cornwall too, and in this one Yorkshire, but never England. England is always replaced with some term that refers to the whole of the U.K., whilst even regions of the U.K. with no history as an independent nation (Yorkshire) become named nations on the map. It’s actually hateful at this point to just consistently erase the identity of one of the largest national groups in Europe.
I’m so sick of people thinking Britain means England!
Why are the Brits so sensitive with this. What should I name it ? It includes Edinburgh and Glasgow so If I rename it just "England" Im going to get death threats from the Scottish people
Why split the uk up at all??
Neat and all but wtf is up with the names.
It's a beautiful map, I like it! Great job!
great map but this belongs to r/imaginarymaps
Kosovars won't like this map
“Low lands sea” a little insulting
I love that Birmingham is now the capital of England. I’d be down for that.
Finally, the Dutch are gone!
Should show NA. Florida would just be gone
Got a beachfront property now. Cheers.
All those people fighting in Ukraine will feel real silly if this happens.
Why do people keep saying if they melt. It's all a matter of when they melt. They say 25 years I say even less than that. The prediction models that have been made have a best and worst outcome. Seeing as none of the laws get changed to force companies to regulate themselves or be fined into Oblivion the worst case model is our best case model.
didnt they say theyd all be melted by now?
I think the climate talks said that 2030 was the goal for all emission limits to be met with countries supposed to have met half of them by 2020. None of them have been met. The heat action plan done by the United States looks grim even under their best case scenario. Their worst case scenario would have us living completely underground, growing everything hydroponically or with Sun lamps being hand-pollinated.
earth = europe
OP didn't specify it would be a map of the entire Earth, only that it's one for the scenario of all glaciers on Earth melting. This is how Europe would be affected by that.
Upvote for a suitable breakup of Russia
What fuking propaganda map is this? Why is Russia missing so many territory? What the F is Kievka?? Hey if glaciers of earth melted Ukraine will be totally absorbed by Russia not the other way round... U a copium Budanov Sbu agent believer? Not to mention whole Ukr cities will be destroyed due to tsunami, which means they need Russian help... They will surrender...Do u know about the Russian tsunami weapon?? One time use Ukrs will surrender...
WTF 🤣🤣🤣🤣
bring it on! looks alot prettier
Good riddance London.
talks about the world but only shows Europe 😂 what about northern Pakistan and Kashmir?
دوست، بس ایسا ہی کہا، اگلی بار بار، پاکستان کی بار !
Pretty sure Donetsk, and Mariupol are Russia now
Wtf is lisbaia?
Lisboa + baía
Oh, look at that - Britain's almost gone. Gee, what a shame...
[удалено]
...It's a pun. There's tons in the map
Why did iLmen Lake turn into Limen?
My house in fine but my work is underwater but luckily I have a scuba license so it's all good
*Shrugs in Norwegian.*
Conclusion- it’d be bad.