this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2023
548 points (96.3% liked)

World News

32075 readers
1069 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Researchers have predicted the collapse of the AMOC could happen any time between 2025 and 2095 — far sooner than previous predictions, although not all scientists are convinced.

=====

What if...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] virr@lemmy.world 51 points 1 year ago (3 children)

TL;DR: New statistical model suggests that the AMOC (including gulf stream) could collapse to the much slower pattern by 2025 to 2095. This is a century earlier than previous predictions and the researchers were concerned. There is some questions on the accuracy of the model used, and that needs more research.

Personally I don't think we should wait for further testing to vet the model before acting. Try to do better now.

[–] jerdle_lemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's kind of important whether it's 2095 (prepare for it, set up nuclear, reduce carbon emissions) or 2025 (fuck global warming, we need fuel and we need it now, the more carbon emitted the better).

[–] virr@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Local cooling still global warming overall.

The collapse of the current in the model is a direct result of global warming. The solution is to act like climate change is an emergency because it is.

[–] jerdle_lemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's true if it's closer to 2095. If it's closer to 2025, there's fuck all we can do to stop it, and so we need to do what's best to survive it, which is not the same as what's best to prevent it.

[–] 30isthenew29@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Scientists shouldn’t talk about the chances of not if something is sure enough. Politicians will latch onto that. Just make broad statements and go. Just like with the movie ‘Don’t look up’.

[–] nexusband@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

Not really - the AMOC collaps between 2025 and 2095 was already in a 2005 paper. Nothing really "new", IMHO.