AMOC Collapse: Timing & Impacts, with Climate Scientist René van Westen 

might help if they weren't chuckling all the way through it?

"global warming" was never real. It is the biggest scam in all of time. Seeing as it is down to 5°C here in south england at 05:30 am and that nothing they ever talked about happened, it is obvious.

Grand solar minimum would barely make a dent in human-caused global warming - no more than 0.3°C cooling over the 21st century. Source: J.G. Anet et al. (2013). Earth's magnetic field strength today remains about 90% of what it was two centuries ago. The current trend of strength loss is only about 5% per century. Source: Korte (2019).

I've seen it. Absolutely false. All you guys can do is point to each other's work, can't even explain your own. Your heroes have bad math and no understanding of cause and effect.@@garysarela4431

While implementing geo-engineering carries some risks, *not* implementing geo-engineering likely carries much larger risks. There are no status quo options anymore. See my episode on The Trolley Problem: ru-vid.comsgs_tboPwvA

Will never happen. If it happens the world we know did not exist. Should be an Event like after the great flood. Go Google catastrophic plate tectonics from baumgardner snelling vardiman wise Austin.

I believe the main issue is the fresh water runoff. This weakens the AMOC and since the AMOC itself brings salty water to the system, the slowdown furthers weakens the AMOC until a critical threshold is reached.

@@climatechat Thanks for the clarification. In no video or article I found it was made clear which process is stronger. As I understand the warmer water by itself is also slowing down the AMOC as warmer water doesn't sink that easy. Would be interesting to know how big the influence of both factors is distributed in percentage terms - if this is even possible to say.

Go find a high bridge liar

Simply not true. "While all models are wrong, some are useful" Here is one example: www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/hansens-1988-projections/ "The bottom line? Scenario B is pretty close and certainly well within the error estimates of the real world changes. And if you factor in the 5 to 10% overestimate of the forcings in a simple way, Scenario B would be right in the middle of the observed trends. It is certainly close enough to provide confidence that the model is capable of matching the global mean temperature rise!"

​@@climatechatyou seem to be an old liar

Only if you believe these panicking guys

Decarbonize our civilization, all the aerosols rain down and suddenly we're over 2℃ which is a death sentence. How do you suggest our civilization survive that when we're at 1.5℃ and have megadroughts, methane feedbacks, massive wildfires year round, and not to mention a lot more crop failures ensuring more starvation. Parts of the world are getting uninhabitable, climate refugees flee to other countries who gradually shift towards rightwing fascism to keep said refugees out due to their own resource constraints caused by climate change. The worst possible side effects of SRM are already less horrifying than the best cases of any scenario where we don't do SRM. We've already screwed things up horribly. Though, like antidepressants to a depressed person, SRM will not solve the problem, but it will give us the time and stability to allow us a second chance at getting it right.

Implicit in your comment is the idea that things might be better without climate interventions such as SRM. But as you can see from today's discussion, a world with >2ºC warming, an AMOC collapse, and other impacts of the past and current geoengineering we are doing to the planet will not be acceptable to anyone. The purpose of SRM is to *reduce* the impacts of human geoenginnering. What's really insane is that we continued to increase fossil fuel emissions after we were clearly warned of the consequences of doing so 40 years ago.

I’d say 45, but yes, totally agree. They need to sit down.

the corporations plan to adapt, not mitigate@@climatechat

@@jessieadore How about instead you just listen to younger people? I've been fighting for action on climate change for over 20 years. How about you?

Hahaha What else could they use, another planet just like Earth to do a few experiments ?

Say the truth The "AMOC To Collapse Scam" Is Back How does the AMOC work? The AMOC is a large system of ocean currents, like a conveyor belt, driven by differences in temperature and salt content - the water's density. As warm water flows northwards it cools and some evaporation occurs, which increases the amount of salt in the water. Low temperature and a high salt content make the water denser, and this dense water sinks deep into the ocean. The cold, dense water slowly spreads southwards, several kilometres below the surface. Eventually, it gets pulled back to the surface and warms in a process called "upwelling" and the circulation is complete. This global process makes sure that the world's oceans are continually mixed, and that heat and energy are distributed around the earth. This, in turn, contributes to the climate we experience today. Has the AMOC been changing? Oceanographers have been measuring the AMOC continuously since 2004. The measurements have shown that the AMOC varies from year to year, and it is likely that these variations have an impact on the weather in the UK. However it is too early to say for sure whether there are any long term trends. Before 2004 the AMOC was only measured a few times, and to go back further into the past we need to look at indirect evidence (for example from sediments on the sea floor). The indirect evidence doesn't always agree on the details, but it seems likely that there have been some large, rapid changes in the AMOC in the past (for example around the end of the last ice age). What will be the effect of climate change on the AMOC? Climate models suggest that the AMOC will weaken over the 21st Century as greenhouse gases increase. This is because as the atmosphere warms, the surface ocean beneath it retains more of its heat. Meanwhile increases in rainfall and ice melt mean it gets fresher too. All these changes make the ocean water lighter and so reduce the sinking in the ' conveyor belt', leading to a weaker AMOC. So the AMOC is very likely to weaken, but it's considered very unlikely that large, rapid changes in the AMOC, as seen in past times, will happen in the 21st Century. The effect of a weaker AMOC is included when making projections of future climate change for the UK. A weaker AMOC will bring less warm water northwards, and this will partly offset the warming effect of the greenhouse gases over western Europe. For the gradual weakening that is likely over the 21st Century, the overall effect is still a warming. Oceanographers have been measuring the AMOC continuously since 2004. The measurements have shown that the AMOC varies from year to year, and it is likely that these variations have an impact on the weather in the UK. However it is too early to say for sure whether there are any long term trends. Before 2004 the AMOC was only measured a few times, So we only have data since 2004, and the year to year variations are large. To pretend that such a short series is in any way significant is not only unscientific but fraudulent.

@nehner thanks for the reply. I had a hunch that it is mostly fearmongering bs like so much you hear nowadays but good to see that confirmed!!

@@alexschievink solid sources in climate are notrickszone wattsupwiththat and german Eike, australias Malcolm roberts

@@alexschievink the guys here deleted my recommendations for you about serious climate information sources.could be also the Yt liarprotectionalgorithm.

Who is "we" kimosabe?

Exactly! Nobody knows, and models only get you so far. At least not enough to justify dangerous experiments.