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…

199 points

I’m so tired of living in a world of impending doom. This is hell.

permalink
report
reply
67 points

The phrase “may you live in interesting times” is a curse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

“Despite being so common in English as to be known as the “Chinese curse”, the saying is apocryphal, and no actual Chinese source has ever been produced.” - Wikipedia

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Oh is this a thing? The phrase has been on my mind lately and I’m like no, it’s a fucking curse. Thanks for the trivia!!

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

“Exciting times, kiddo”

permalink
report
parent
reply
61 points

And they know how to fucking fix it but don’t want to

It’d be like if in the movie Armageddon the government just said “Eh let’s see if it really will be that bad if it hits us”

permalink
report
parent
reply
53 points

So Don’t Look Up.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

That movie felt way too real watching it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Yes but without the part where they tried

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

This is because you’re not sorting your recycling!

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

“We could do something about the asteroid, but think of the harm doing something could do to the shareholders!?”

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I was going to save humanity but I have a responsibility to a handful of shareholders that yell at me in meetings so… You can really see how hard this is for me

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It’s actually kind of too late now.

But, we may be able to prevent more bad stuff happening if we change things today!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

IDK, I mean we know it’s to do with carbon but we don’t really know how to stop producing that in a timely manner.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Yes we do. Carbon tax.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

Carbon is causing global warming. We know how to fix global warming because we are causing it, we just have to stop doing it.

This article is about global cooling which is bizarre and not something we expected would be happening. We haven’t got a clue why it’s doing that. It maybe natural, or it maybe it’s something we’ve done in a complicated way, but we don’t know so we don’t know how to fix it.

If this is just an ice age why may as well burn all the coal now to try and stave it off.

Although in reality I think this needs a lot more research before we do anything because this announcement makes no sense within our current understanding of the environmental science.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Umm, no. Go read it again.

Global warming shuts off the current, so the warm air doesn’t shuttle north, causing local cooling, not global

permalink
report
parent
reply
55 points

Good news! Soon the doom won’t be impending!

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=mC4VflOayBw

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

Have you tried being absurdly wealthy?

I haven’t myself, but I hear it makes it all worth it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

It’s on my to-do list.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

I just long for a time when the conspiracy theorists are yelling about the end of the world and the scientists are running the country, not the other way around.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

The doom depends on where you live. Florida? Yup, probably, but you where already living in hell. Europe? Iced up North Sea, really snowy north, big ice caps, Spain and portugal getting more cool…doesn’t sound that bad, to me personally.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

What? I moved to the nordics so that I’d be living in a tropical paradise soon, now there’s going to be more snow?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Michigan’s Upper Peninsula is one of the places least likely to be affected by climate change, based on current models. In the US anyway.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Mostly florida, as the “AMOC” transports the heat away from florida. Could very well be, that a stoppage of the AMOC would create a Hypercane and completely wreck everything in Florida. Cuba could also be absolutely done for. Canada would also probably have a LOT more snow - the Soutpole however would probably stop existing and what exactly is going to happen to Brazil is a complete unknown. Some simulations show the insta death of the rest of the rain forest. Some simulations actually show the opposite. However, Europe, Africa and Asia probably would see a lot lower temps - what exactly that would mean for the Climate in those areas is also highly speculative - however, it’s something that happened quite often throughout the history of earth. North America however has lots of other parts liveable, when Florida is “dead” and basically the Sahara.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
99 points

but other scientists are not so sure.

Is it just me who thinks we should act as if it is going to collapse soon, even if a few scientists aren’t sure?

permalink
report
reply
152 points

But what if it’s all a hoax and we make the world a better place for no reason?

permalink
report
parent
reply
74 points

Won’t someone think of the shareholders?

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

I am never going to recover financially from this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I mean, that is always a concern lol.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points

I really hate this line of thinking.

“Making the world a better place” would be an enormous sacrifice for most people. There would be massive financial ramifications. Our quality of life would decrease significantly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

You can’t eat money. Our quality of life is already decreasing because of this. How do you think people’s quality of life in Europe is going to be when the Gulfstream current shuts down and stops bringing warm tropical water to them? Reducing our exploitation of natural resources is not a sacrifice, it’s the right thing to do. What we’ve been doing is wrong.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Aha! So that one fringe scientists isn’t sure? Then maybe nothing will happen so let’s continue the course!

World leaders mentality

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I think it’s more 99.9% of the scientists think it will get proper fucked up in the 2100s, but this one report says it’ll happen in the next few years.

But we should be doing something about it anyway.

If we actually cared we’d ban everything that’s fucking the world up, and ban any imports from countries that don’t agree. But if the last 5 years or so have told us anything, it’s that a lot of people don’t care. Even about things that directly affect them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

And people who do care often feel impotent to do anything about it.

Agree that drastic measures are necessary. It doesn’t even have to mean a drop in living standards; but it will take radical changes to protect (and even raise) those standards.

Agree about imports. The problem I see is that even if products with a high carbon footprint are imported, it doesn’t mean the person responsible for that carbon footprint isn’t domestic to e.g. (going by your ‘feddit.uk’ handle) the UK. This could still be captured by an import ban (i.e. shareholders can’t just export their emissions and pretend everything is okay), but the people with the power to export their emissions tend to have a lot of power to lobby the government, sit on government decision-making panels, or even choose MPs. They’re unlikely to shoot themselves in the foot like that.

An example is laptops. They break every few years. For the past decade-or-so, they’re made to be irreparable. They become landfill, and all that embodied carbon is wasted. Today’s laptops don’t even do anything that laptops of 15 years ago couldn’t do, except deal with websites bloated with adverts. It doesn’t matter so much where that consumer item is produced. The problem is the decision to make it so that it breaks and has to be replaced. Those decisions tend to be made in the west by people who will never willingly change their ways. It’s all about profit.

I think part of the reason that people feel apathetic is that they know it’s all about profit and are convinced that a system based on profit is the only way, so there’s nothing to be done. Another way is possible, though, people just need to be organised and educated§ to achieve it.


§ I mean working-class education, not e.g. going to college/university.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I didn’t realise how bad laptops had got until I had to repair one for my uncle a few years ago.

I’d always known laptops to be pretty good. Panels underneath for access to RAM and HDD (the most common things to need replacing), and a removable battery.

This thing was glued shut. I did manage to get it open and replace the drive with an SSD, but it was clearly designed to be thrown away once anything went wrong with it. Getting it back together again meant the trackpad didn’t work reliably any more, but what can you do?

Anyway, I digress. I fear that real change means a drop in living standards for many. It’s unpalatable to the career politicians whose only real motivation to do anything is to get re-elected every 4-5 years, and maybe line their own pockets courtesy of corporate donors.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Actions that work in the possible world in which it collapses soon are actively harmful in possible worlds in which it doesn’t. Acting as if a threat will happen only makes sense if the action isn’t significantly harmful in cases where it doesn’t, where significantly is based on the harm of not being prepared and the chance of it happening.

If the Gulf Stream will collapse by 2025, the response isn’t to be more eco-friendly. In fact, it’s the opposite. Everyone in the north should prepare to burn a lot more fuel, and concern for global warming would definitely be reduced. Global warming is something you can only afford to give a shit about when temperatures haven’t just dropped by 3.5C and you haven’t just lost 78% of your arable land (UK figures, because that’s where I live).

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Do you mean that people need to see how their life will get worse before they will be willing to act? That sounds a little accelerationist to me. But I’m not entirely sure of your argument. You seem to be saying that people would not be worried if they lost 4/5ths of their arable land, but I think I must be misunderstanding something.

(I think it’s s tributary to the Gulf Stream that is at risk of collapsing, not the Gulf Stream itself, which, I’m told, is based on the earth’s rotation rather than climate.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You are. People would be very worried. It’s just that their worry would not be expressed in attempts to improve things in the long-term when there’s a short-term disaster.

If the Gulf Stream will definitely collapse in 2025 (which is not what the study says), then that’s too soon to do anything about, so the priority is surviving it rather than preventing it. Fundamentally, things that help prevent disaster are not the same as things that help survive it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-62 points

Well, all their predictions were wrong so far

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Your right, they said we had way longer before the climate would start collapsing, they should have warned us HARDER

permalink
report
parent
reply
-27 points

We should have been dead by now, 20 times, according to the scientists

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Well yes we keep finding it’s getting worse quicker than anticipated

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

This is just demonstrably false.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Genuine question: What do you understand by scientific ‘prediction’?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

Make a prediction model, plug in the data and release the results to the public. Prediction turns out to be wrong, rinse and repeat

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That really shouldn’t matter. We should still care and prevent any more damage. Big polluters need to be stopped

permalink
report
parent
reply
50 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

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).

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

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’.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

We could try to vote people who will take action OR incentivize consumers to be more proactive BUT. Neither is ever going to happen.

I was having dinner with my brother’s family and we were watching an interview with some celebrity that my sister-in-law adores. Dude is heavy in green activism and lists fast food places which are bad actors for climate and also farmers rights, etc. So my SiL announces we are never eating at such and such place again (I can’t remember, I never eat fast food anyway). The very next night they order takeout from said fast food place. They also always order same day deliver from Amazon despite it never actually arriving same day, but they get packages every damn day. Tons and tons of packaging for crap they always throw out or give away to neighbors eventually. This isn’t unique to them.

This is MOST of America and I suspect the rest of the developed world. We are effed.

permalink
report
reply
13 points

cant elect people in america who would do anything, when we’re busy trying to fend off full blown fourth reichdom by electing the least awful candidate each election.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I posted this twice now.

But carbon taxes, externality corrections, cost of recycling plastic is in the cost of the product. Let the market fix it all. But no, people won’t even agree to raise taxes on fuel

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

How rich are they to be able to afford that? Most Americans arent Tywin Lannister living in their castle getting fancy mail brought to them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

Goodbye Iceland my old friend.

permalink
report
reply

Why is everything so fucked and we don’t have any agency in changing it

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Carbon tax would go a long long long way. It would just have to be more severe than any politician would be willing to go.

We have the answers and economists and scientists know what needs to be done it’s just the politicians (and people) won’t allow it.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I mean I’m sure it’ll still be okay in Iceland, not great but it’s an island and the global climate is still warming, so still hope

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Maybe I don’t get it, but as far as I understand, the golf stream brings hot air to north Europe. This is why you can live on Iceland while at the same latitude on the center of Canada is unhabitable.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Create post

News from around the world!

Rules:

  • Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc

  • No NSFW content

  • No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

Community stats

  • 5.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 118K

    Comments