From the emergency zone
From P Gosselin on February 2, 2025
The AMOC dispute
By Frank Bosse
(Translated from the original in climate news)
We kept her, dear reader, informed you very immediately about Amoc expressions.
Recently we also informed you about a new study in which a stable Atlantic has been found since the 1960s. It's not the only one in the recent past.
However, Prof. Stefan Rahmstorf from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) is a great advocate of the scenarios “The Day after Tomorrow” of a collapsing oceanic current. In June 2024 he found on X (formerly Twitter) that the AMOC reduction saga “is even more dramatic than ever”.
He himself had been responsible for a whole series of newspapers as an author or co-author, which also contributed to the scenario, and in autumn 2024 he initiated an “open letter” that spoke dramatically. We also reported about it.
Of course, the new findings could not hand it over without comment. Under the heading “The AMOC slows down, is stable, yes, no, no, yes …”, he commented on it in the blog “Real Climate”, which is led by scientists, including himself, Gavin Schmidt from NASA and others .
What he has to say can be put to the point: he defends his approaches and lists the problems of recent studies. That was to be expected. For example, he emphasizes that the new climate models (CMIP 6) hardly a connection between “its fingerprint”, the sea surface temperatures of the “heating hole” in the North Atlantic (see article here from January 17, 2025) and the actual current, but that the approximately 4 Years older are called CMIP5. He also asks whether the new ones are very reliable in this regard than the older ones. However, the efforts for the former were considerable.
He summarized:
I don't think the newer methods are more reliable than the old (his, the author). … since we have no measurements that return far enough, there is still a certain uncertainty in this regard … “
And that's the core of the matter! He does not believe in everyone, but knowledge in science would probably be more appropriate! And yes, everything is uncertain and “nothing is known precisely”.
This is also given by the well -known oceanologist Carl Wunsch in a newspaper published in August 2022:
In the coming decades, continuous monitoring of the entire coupled ocean atmospheric system will be necessary to evaluate the actual risks of the AMOC collapse, but so far There is no evidence of an upcoming or overwhelming danger. “
There are many assumptions, a lot back and forth in science, and if they are viewed in the light of the day, a lot of “faith” or “non-belief”, ie the unmistakable reference to a lack of knowledge.
So if, dear reader, a trained psychologist is again told in a news magazine that “there is an immediate danger in a few decades when things are going badly” (see here) or here: “Europe's heating is weak”: be Be careful that people do a “certainty” that simply does not exist. As I said, it is often about assumptions and faith or non-belief.
Prof. Rahmstorf also hurried to say: “The golf current system fails”, and not “the golf current system” could “somewhere, someday, somewhere, somewhere”, the northern branch, the amoc may be stable or no ((yes (((((((((( ) ((yes, according to his own blog heading).
Image: Creates with the KNMI climate researcher.
The AMOC is still in excellent health today, as the measurements from 2004 show. These are the actual “hard facts”.
We should finally stop frightening people in the Atlantic, it does not work with enlightened citizens like you, dear readers.
Like this:
Load…
Related
Do you discover more from watts?
Subscribe to the latest posts to your e -mail.
