Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?

atlasobscura.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 222 posts

Re: Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?

#51

Post by sbradford26 »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #25
mcphage wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Either by moving here That's one of the reasons I'm staying where I am. > trying to move it there Being that they straddle the US / Canadian border, it's legally much more difficult to mass pump water out of them. Probably the main reason it hasn't happened yet.

It's legally forbidden by treaty of all the states and provinces that border them. For now. There's also little reason for it. There's plenty of rich farmland here to grow on. Agriculture should move back to this region, and growing practices and crops adapt for the colder climate. Growing heavily irrigated crops in the desert or semi-arid regions has many advantages but makes little sense in a water constrained worl…

I grew up in West Michigan in the farming country of Michigan, more specifically apple orchard/fruit orchard country. Michigan is the third largest producer of apples after Washington and NY. Also further up near Traverse city they produce a lot of grapes and cherries, and have some very good wineries. I think a big part of why there is not as much farming as the west is simply a matter of space, Michigan is large but nothing like the plains states.

Re: Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?

#52

Post by aurizon »

ham-sandwich wrote: post #38
ceejayoz wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By act of Congress, not Constitutional amendment. It could be repealed in a matter of weeks if Congress saw fit.

I know many people who would oppose removal of water from the region with weaponry. People deeply care about them, more than outsiders know

Do they also fight the Atlantic Alliance - a network of global seas whose task is to suck the land dry? In jest. A large part of runoff leads to the Arctic oceans = warm water = melts ice. Southern diversion would help the southwest. Since it is political, it will be delayed ad infinitum until there is only dry dust to pump.

Re: Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?

#53

Post by quietbritishjim »

technothrasher wrote: post #47
dncornholio wrote: post #9

I think to call it a sea it must be huge and salty. The arguments against this in the article is that Baltic sea is "pretty fresh", so it actually is salty. They also say the Dead sea is a lake, which is logical because it's tiny. If anyone can point to a sea that's not salty, I'd be happy to know. Until then, these are just lakes! Which is fine, because a sea is not better than a lake, and vice versa.

> If anyone can point to a sea that's not salty, I'd be happy to know. Until then, these are just lakes! That feels a bit circular. If you define sea as having to contain saltwater, then how could anybody point you to a sea that isn't salty?

Because language is defined by usage, if there was a body of water that is freshwater but widely agreed to be a sea then the parent commenter is agreeing to revise their definition to match.

Re: Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?

#54

Post by bilbo0s »

pc86 wrote: post #40
ham-sandwich wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know many people who would oppose removal of water from the region with weaponry. People deeply care about them, more than outsiders know

And that's all well and good so long as the law backs you up. When it doesn't, that then falls somewhere on a spectrum from felony to treason.

Yeah. I was just thinking that. I mean if the rest of the country decides that georgia and florida need our water, which is one of the more serious current proposals, then that's democracy. I'm from Wisconsin. Born and raised right on the shores of Lake Michigan. But the law is the law.

Our best bet is to do our utmost to ensure that the law stays the way it is despite whatever pressures there are from other areas of the country.

Re: Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?

#56

Post by dncornholio »

webstrand wrote: post #19
dncornholio wrote: post #9

I think to call it a sea it must be huge and salty. The arguments against this in the article is that Baltic sea is "pretty fresh", so it actually is salty. They also say the Dead sea is a lake, which is logical because it's tiny. If anyone can point to a sea that's not salty, I'd be happy to know. Until then, these are just lakes! Which is fine, because a sea is not better than a lake, and vice versa.

The Sea of Galilee is actually freshwater. But on the other hand lake doesn't imply freshwater, e.g. The Great Salt Lake.

A lake can be salty, but a sea cannot be fresh. The Sea of Galilee is a lake, just like the Dead Sea.

Re: Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?

#57

Post by TecoAndJix »

nemo44x wrote: post #32
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #16

Seas or not, I love the lakes and the land around them, in the 20+ years since I moved myself here they've taken over my heart. I'm from the aspen parkland of central Alberta; thin trees, dry air, small muddy leach-infested kettle lakes, big skies, poplar and birch land. When I was 8 we did a trip across Canada, and I remember us camping by the shores of Superior when a massive thunderstorm came rolling in, and it le…

I guess. I don’t miss them and always thought they were cold and smelly and didn’t make for great beaches. The weather around them is awful as well with long, bitter cold winters and summer days that are often extremely humid. You can’t really eat the fish out them either due to high levels of mercury. Additionally the land around the lakes is nice but not spectacular. At least not for North America. If I were to pla…

I have been to a Great Lake one time (Lake Erie) and it made me sad. The shore had a bunch of dead fish all over it and it smelled very bad. The person i was with, an Erie, PA native, said that the water was pretty much "dead". Very antidotal but if left an impression on me.

Re: Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?

#58

Post by _ph_ »

I think the distinction should be easy in this case. First of all, the great lakes are sweet water, not just water with low salinity. But most important of all: they are not directly connected to the ocean. All oceans are directly connected to each other, a ship can change between them without using locks, but they are required to reach the great lakes.

Re: Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?

#59

Post by greedo »

nemo44x wrote: post #32
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #16

Seas or not, I love the lakes and the land around them, in the 20+ years since I moved myself here they've taken over my heart. I'm from the aspen parkland of central Alberta; thin trees, dry air, small muddy leach-infested kettle lakes, big skies, poplar and birch land. When I was 8 we did a trip across Canada, and I remember us camping by the shores of Superior when a massive thunderstorm came rolling in, and it le…

I guess. I don’t miss them and always thought they were cold and smelly and didn’t make for great beaches. The weather around them is awful as well with long, bitter cold winters and summer days that are often extremely humid. You can’t really eat the fish out them either due to high levels of mercury. Additionally the land around the lakes is nice but not spectacular. At least not for North America. If I were to pla…

You can eat the fish. They recommend not eating it more than once a week though.

Re: Are the Great Lakes really inland seas?

#60

Post by gunfighthacksaw »

We are blessed in Ontario to have the first and second longest freshwater beaches in the world.

On Lake Huron’s Georgian Bay and Lake Huron proper respectively.

Nothing recharges your batteries like a day in the sun, by the great un-briny. A few clandestine cans of beer, a fruit salad and a little bit of the sticky green stuff: heaven.

Post reply on HN