Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] t1_je79vuy wrote

[deleted]

45

kenlasalle t1_je7ausk wrote

Absolutely well before. I wouldn't be surprised if it was changed to 2030.

Climate change has always exceeded both time and severity estimates. That must has been consistent.

29

[deleted] t1_je7iqdq wrote

[removed]

3

kenlasalle t1_je7o5vx wrote

I didn't say it's worse than the IPCC says. I was referring to history, the past 50 years. Put down your knee jerk and listen.

4

mtandy t1_je87ga7 wrote

>In a study accepted for publication in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, a research team led by Zeke Hausfather of the University of California, Berkeley, conducted a systematic evaluation of the performance of past climate models. The team compared 17 increasingly sophisticated model projections of global average temperature developed between 1970 and 2007, including some originally developed by NASA, with actual changes in global temperature observed through the end of 2017. The observational temperature data came from multiple sources, including NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP) time series, an estimate of global surface temperature change.

>The results: 10 of the model projections closely matched observations. Moreover, after accounting for differences between modeled and actual changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide and other factors that drive climate, the number increased to 14. The authors found no evidence that the climate models evaluated either systematically overestimated or underestimated warming over the period of their projections.

> Put down your knee jerk and listen.

2

[deleted] t1_je7e0cv wrote

I think the Roland Emmerech movie The Day After Tomorrow had this as a plot line?

0

agrk t1_je8n4ye wrote

Wrong ocean current and a somewhat unrealistic scenario, but yes, it has.

In the real world, the North-Atlantic current has been struggling for almost a decade now. The adjoining Gulf stream almost stopped completely for a while during that BP oil spill, and the system has been wonky since.

Luckily, there's no current risk of people being deep frozen within minutes. Lots of snow and warm winters are coming though.

2

[deleted] t1_je9ruq9 wrote

Wow, did not know that about the BP spill, how was that able to happen?

1

agrk t1_jebej4i wrote

I won't claim I understand the details, but there were quite a few reports of disruptions of the Gulf Stream during the months after the incident. Mind you, temporary disruptions happen everey now and then -- the main issues if they were permanent would be the effects of the weather and the underwater ecosystem in the North Atlantic.

1

[deleted] t1_jebvj8t wrote

Hmmmm, I just did not know oil spills could do this. Unless it was just becasue the oil spill was so historically huge.

1

agrk t1_jedgidz wrote

It was huge. It also contained lots of methane, they sprayed chemicals all over the Mexican gulf to contain the spill, an explosion, a sunken oil rig, etc. As mentioned, I remember it from the news back then and don't really have a clue about the details. :D

Regardless, the point was that currents can change without Jake Gyllenhall having to chase antibiotics on a derelict frozen tanker in NYC.

The changes will mostly destabilize the weather, and prevent heat from being transferred from A to B. And long those long-term weather effects are scarier than Hollywood blockbusters.

1

[deleted] t1_jeep2hs wrote

Would it make the weather colder, warmer, or just more extreme in general?

1

agrk t1_jefo80y wrote

Currents transport heat from one place to another, so "all of the above".

1

[deleted] t1_je7dxwu wrote

Was this the plot of the Day After Tomorrow movie?

4

Nightgaun7 t1_je80olt wrote

There is a feasible offramp. People just refuse to take it.

2

Grouchy_Wish_9843 t1_je819iw wrote

Unfortunately the Gov is stuck in a war and international fairs and will get back to you next Presidential Election.

Biden 2024 /s , but why is he seriously the #1 Poll?

0

StuffNbutts t1_je7hz2u wrote

I'm sure this won't have irreversible negative consequences for all currently living species.

27

Consignore t1_je9hr40 wrote

Nope it will decimate some but this is a cycle, the seas were much higher and will become so again then recede.

−3

SirThatOneGuy42 t1_je9nhwz wrote

sounds like millions of dead people idk why you're treating such change as "normal"

1

Substantial-Pass-992 t1_je7bf6e wrote

Can someone ELI Michael Scott how?

5

radleft t1_je7hwsw wrote

Extremely cold/dense water underneath Antarctic's floating/shelf glaciers sinks to the bottom & flows North. The sinking of the water pulls in more water under the glacier, and this interaction drives the system.

The deep cold currents split & keep heading North until they upwell in various places, and this helps to cool the environments in which these events occur.

The sudden collapse of a floating/shelf glacier would instantly shut off the system that keeps the water flowing. The upwelling may occur for a short time after, just from momentum, but the 'pressure' driving the system has been cut off.

The effected environments would suffer rapid heating; with attending biological disasters.

12

wordswontcomeout OP t1_je7ca5b wrote

Influx of cold water changes temperature gradients that effect how the current works in moving cold water to hot areas and hot water to cold areas I think.

10

PurpleQueenLily t1_je7efks wrote

So we could see, for exemple, Quebec getting the France climate and inversaly?

3

Itoucheditfora t1_je8wmyi wrote

I would say more of stagnant movement of waters, death of food cycles and the communities that depend upon them... including commercial businesses.

3

MSeanF t1_je7hoox wrote

I think salinity levels also play a part.

3

Bomb_Shell14 t1_je7ckkz wrote

So your parents give you a dollar to start a lemonade stand..

3

rmoss20 t1_je7l0xu wrote

“This plantation, we're running low on greenbacks. We're having problems paying the people who give us the seeds and the dirt. We can't pay"

1

Subject_Bite7007 t1_je8cm2o wrote

This is a concious choice by all of humanity to sink this ship no matter what you tell yourselves we have allowed this to happen because we want "easy lives" or "to live our dreams" whatever that crud means, Blame the corps all you want but we are implicit in this all the same

5

totallyawesome143 t1_je7jqgy wrote

Maybe the deep current will shift to a more shallow current and everyone can benefit from this?

2

Grouchy_Wish_9843 t1_je81my4 wrote

Have you seen the heat bubble eating away the crab population?

3

totallyawesome143 t1_jeadosi wrote

Maybe the heat bubbles will force the crabs to move to a better spot where we can more easily capture and eat them? Also, maybe the heat bubbles will make it so fishes who like heat bubbles will thrive and grow to be super fish that eat plastics and the waste byproduct from their rectum is food for other fishe.

1

-SPOF t1_je7plph wrote

It seems to be that good news just finished.

1

4inaroom t1_je8afu6 wrote

So, invest in Air Conditioning stocks?

No point in living on a super heated planet, stuck indoors, and being poor, right?

1

Consignore t1_je9hkz8 wrote

At one point the earth had much higher seas and people managed, all this means is those living next to the sea will have to relocate, yes many large cities but it will result in more being built inland.

1

themoocowgoesmeow t1_je9pjqx wrote

The logistics of that though... your explanation is missing the sense of difficulty to relocate such a massive amount of people. Population and population density in coastal regions is much different now than whichever time period you are referring to.

1

lonewolf420 t1_jebda8n wrote

more likely sea walls will be built and capital intensive pump stations will be utilized in last ditch efforts to save major metro areas along the coast and tributaries.

we are talking most large populous cities in the US as they are mostly costal, The less populated cities will just be abandoned as it won't be worth saving causing immigration into other areas further exacerbating living situations on cities or communities not prepared for large influx of people moving inland or to sea-walled city outskirts were climate refuge camps will most likely be erected.

1

Longshotsquirrely t1_jebn43n wrote

Two questions. 1. Is their any chance of this fixing and what are the scenarios/timelines for that(btw I mean like the currents restarting or resuming over time) 2. If the currents are slowing down faster than expected is there any chance they resume or speed back up faster than expected?

1