big kudos for appologizing and taking the error. I wished all web discussions were this interesting and civil

2007 = 520,000 sq mi
1997 = 52,000 sq mi
1987 = 5,200 sq mi
1977 = 520 sq mi
1967 = 52 sq mi
1957 = 5 sq mi

Take 1977 with about 500 square miles, or say a 25 x 20 mile area. What are the odds that anyone would even notice a 25 x 20 square mile area of water with garbage floating in it at the density shown in the videos (and probably less at that time), especially in that area? And a decade before that?

The photo you referenced is actually a phenomenon associated with plankton “hatching” off the coast of Japan. No pics exist of this supposed island because it doesn’t exist…it’s a hoax!

If this “3.5 million ton floating garbage island” were packed into the density you normally find in a landfill, it would take up only about 100 acres. Or to put it another way, to get an island twice the size of Texas, at normal landfill density (make a proper island) you’d need 3 million times as much garbage as is floating in the “island” right now.

Sure it’s bad to have so much rubbish floating in the ocean. But this isn’t an island. It’s more like sprinkling a bit of pepper on a bowl of soup.

http://www.google.com/images?q=great+pacific+
garbage+patch&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=
1B2DVFA_en___US207

http://www.slate.com/id/2221963/?obref=obinsite

Alright, I was searching for info on the trash island and the last post bugged me so much that I created an account just to correct it.

By that math there would only be around 36 square yards per square mile, which is obviously wrong. It’s so far off that I can’t even see what you were trying to do.

Each square mile is 1760 yards wide by 1760 yards long. So, there are over 3 million square yards in a mile. The original calculation is correct and you are way off.

Sailors avoided this area because of lack of wind; fishermen avoid it because of lack of fish to catch. While it’s a concern that a lot of trash is focused in this area, there are worse places it could vortex to!

Of course, if the trash were to vortex to those places, chances are, they would be relatively devoid of life too.

I’ve always pondered whether that would be the ultimate answer to all of our nuc waste. However, don’t you just have a 2nd thought, even a small one, that we should go messing around with our source of heat, light, and life? I’m sorry, but I could never stand behind the idea of sending anything our Star.

The mass was crawling with little crabs and it took a tractor to haul the thing away in pieces after they cut it up.

http://www.kellybreed.com/downloads/flotsam.jpg
http://www.kellybreed.com/downloads/jetsam.jpg

John D’Anna

For reals…NASA needs to come up with an astrogarbage truck to jettison all our crap into what is basically one giant nuclear furnace.

Twice the area of Texas is NOT 1.6 trillion square yards. Texas, according to the US Census Bureau in 2000, has an area of 261,797 square miles, which is only (approximately) 9.2 million square yards.

Therefore, instead of there being 1 pound of garbage every 228 square yards, like you mentioned, there should be about 2535 pounds of garbage every foot. Which is quite a difference.

Spread out over an area twice the size of Texas, you’ll note. Which is roughly 1.6 trillion square yards. Doing the math:

1,600,000,000,000 square yards
/7,000,000,000 pounds =
——————————
1 pound every 228 square yards
or
21.2 pounds/acre

In metric units:
1,360,000,000,000 sq meters
/3,200,000,000 kilograms =
——————————
1 kilogram every 425 square meters
or
23.5 kilograms/hectare

A lot of garbage, but not dense enough to be mistaken for an island.

It doesn’t matter how much it weighs. It matters what the mount consists of.Did you know that if we had a tub big enough, Saturn would FLOAT!!!!! but it’s very unlikely that we could because saturn is bigger than earth and I don’t think the sun aliens would put in the effort to build one. :)