Scientists warn that the Gulf Stream is shifting north, which could mean an ocean current collapse is imminent
Posted by Portalrules123@reddit | collapse | View on Reddit | 177 comments
Longjumping_Share444@reddit
Well, here we are. I was hoping that we'd address climate change before this happened but I guess not.
Portalrules123@reddit (OP)
At this point even if we stopped all emissions my bet is that a AMOC collapse is locked in, but yeah that doesn’t mean that our inability to stop increasing emissions isn’t frustrating as heck.
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
Well, 30% of the American public at least...
with another 30% being vehemently opposed and 40% not giving a shit whatsoever
DrRatio-PhD@reddit
Big props to my 40%ers. Letting a south park episode from 2004 dictate their political strategy
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
Except this time douche vs turd was more like soggy sandwich vs getting set on fire
Da_Question@reddit
To be fair, they played it off like Hillary was the worst thing ever, when in reality she would have been more of the same. Which to be honest is far far better than actively worse in every way possible except for the wealthy.
Morphoopus@reddit
More of the same = Richest, most powerful, most respected country to ever exist on planet Earth by such a longshot that even our enemies pretty much agree. But it wasn't enough for the majority of narcissistic, greedy, whiny American voters.
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
That's the at large part: 60% of America has been struggling for a good while now, and the stock market closing at record highs means nothing to the people who feel none of that and can barely pay rent
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
I think that touches on how fascist governments often seize power:
more of the same clearly isn't working for the average person, which is especially felt when we can't afford healthcare or rent but the economy is allegedly doing fantastic at large.
So people want whoever will make the most changes the quickest, which is usually a terrible idea. I see 2016 as the equivalent of someone searching for stability giving up and trying crack because at least they might feel better on crack than trying and failing constantly
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
collapse-ModTeam@reddit
Rule 1: In addition to enforcing Reddit's content policy, we will also remove comments and content that is abusive or predatory in nature. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Marinah@reddit
Which 30% were vehemently opposed again? It couldn't have been the democrats.
After all, Kamala was just as big a fan of fracking as Trump. And Biden was the president when we had the largest increase in oil consumption/production ever.
https://www.npr.org/2024/08/30/nx-s1-5096107/what-is-fracking-explained
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61545
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
Was she a fan of starting a slew of new wars, removing pollution protections, hiding the epstein files, bypassing congress for unilateral tariffs, profiting in the billions off the presidency, creating a surveillance state, sending immigrations enforcement to harass blue states and separate families, working with the Heritage Foundation to remove women's rights, or destroying social programs in favor of pocketing the money and giving it to corporations?
I refuse to believe somebody who can type as well as you can't understand that of two bad choices one can be (far) worse.
But that doesn't even matter, because the voters I interacted with were not thrilled with her either, they just recognized that she was far, far better than the alternative in that election. And yes, they oppose what's going on now despite her not being perfect or even great
Marinah@reddit
This is the collapse subreddit. 80% of those things will be inconsequential in ten years because neither party has any desire to change course on the path to complete global climate collapse. I spent the Biden presidency practically begging democrats locally to fix anything, to make any change to divert off peak oil and business as usual, and got nowhere. That is my actual experience with the lesser of the two evils. I understand completely that it is a lesser evil, but we're still heading off the cliff no matter who is at the wheel.
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
I still don't see how sprinting full speed off the cliff could possibly be better than walking off of it
Marinah@reddit
It's not better, its not worse. The car is crashing one way or another.
AnarchaComrade@reddit
Tell that to the families being held in concentration camps right now.
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
Less bad literally means better
That doesn't make it okay, but yes, it is better to have more time
allonsyyy@reddit
The largest increase because we were coming out of the pandemic, how dishonest you are.
Oh look, hidden post history. Inflammatory disinformation. 🤖🤖🤖
Marinah@reddit
look at the data you weird fucking dork, that’s clearly not true to anyone with a middle school level of reading comprehension
collapse-ModTeam@reddit
Rule 1: In addition to enforcing Reddit's content policy, we will also remove comments and content that is abusive or predatory in nature. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Rick_Sancheeze@reddit
What’s the point in giving a shit? Either a republican blasts me in the ass or a democrat blasts me in the ass. Neither is going to make a meaningful difference in our emissions. The oligarchs will make sure of that,
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
If you think there isn't a very real difference between the presidencies of Biden vs Trump, for instance, then you're kidding yourself or have not been paying attention
They're both bad, and I get where you're coming from with one side actively destroying the country for profit of big business, and the other side only pretending to try and stop them, but there's still a very large difference.
Like owing my $40 vs $50,000; both are a debt you'd be better off without, but one is far, far more difficult to deal with
KnowledgeMediocre404@reddit
Both are driving to a wall, just because the democrats don't press the pedal to the floor doesn't mean they actually give a shit. They choose to throw the election rather than stop supporting a genocide and have been trying to hide that fact since. They are not good people.
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
I didn't say they were good people, I'm saying MAGA is 1000x worse
There's a big difference between not doing enough to curb corporations vs actively aiding them in dismantling the natural earth for quarterly profit
kingfofthepoors@reddit
I am so sick an tired of the bullshit fucking losers who keep saying they're the same... are the democrats decent human beings ... no are they going to protect the environment and hold billionaires responsible... no... but they are also not going to intentionally speed run us to the apocalypse because they want to watch everything burn to the fucking ground.
KnowledgeMediocre404@reddit
Not protecting our environment and holding billionaires accountable is BURNING DOWN OUR FUCKING PLANET. Democrats aren't decent for burning us more slowly. If anything this Trump term where Republicans hold all levers of power will show people what a disaster they, oil, and billionaires are but let's not pretend Democrats are doing ANYTHING to save us. If a bunch of outsiders like Platner and Talarico can break into the party it just might stand a chance, but the top brass like Jeffries and Schumer are part of the problem.
kingfofthepoors@reddit
I would rather not die, but if I have to die I prefer to take the slower method. If you can't tell the difference than you are just another republican or a foreign troll trying to sow seeds of discontent or just a fucking moron.
KnowledgeMediocre404@reddit
I'm just a Canadian tired of Americans acting like they have no power or agency in their country. Use the second amendment you've been sacrificing children for for decades and cut this shit out immediately.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
collapse-ModTeam@reddit
Rule 1: In addition to enforcing Reddit's content policy, we will also remove comments and content that is abusive or predatory in nature. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
At this stage I assume everyone who holds that perspective is disingenuous, either because they're MAGA or (more likely) because they are a paid agitator.
They pretend not to understand that of two bad choices one can still be obviously far worse than the other
KnowledgeMediocre404@reddit
Choosing the lesser evil is still evil, you still end up in hell. That's the point. You guys need to stop choosing the evil and forcing better choices.
kingfofthepoors@reddit
I 100% concur
Alex5173@reddit
At least under Biden SOME things were improving while the rest mostly stayed the same; under Trump everything is getting worse, faster.
Physical_Ad5702@reddit
What improved? Honest question.
ANoobInDisguise@reddit
It was significantly safer to be trans under Biden for one
Alex5173@reddit
The inflation reduction act and CHIPS act were massively great ideas that Trump scrapped
Marinah@reddit
Biden was on the same path as Trump with regards to climate denial and increased fossil fuel dependency. Kamala would have been on track to join him if she were a real candidate.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61545
Gabbiani@reddit
You are ignoring the entire new green deal which was setting up energy independence while supporting Ukraine and our EU partners with oil that wasn’t coming from Russia or Iran.
Trump just paid $1B to END 2 massive ocean wind farms that were actively being built and generating a lot of good jobs and sustainable energy for the East Coast.
I don’t care who you are - we can’t stop all fossil fuels tomorrow because our country doesn’t have the infrastructure to do it until we make the massive investments that were really starting to gain momentum under Biden.
Congress and Trump ended everything.
No more EPA, no more science funding, no more national protection areas (in fact they are sold to the highest bidder) - we have a data center being built next to Horseshoe Bend now…
There was a big difference and pretending that there wasn’t is a problem.
I’m a lefty myself and understand that waiting for a unicorn is a self sabotaging process that a big chunk of our side decided to take part in
Fragrant-Education-3@reddit
The more accurate metaphor is the Republican wants to shove a live grenade into your ass, while the Democrat is apathetic to it. Not to mention the Republican party is making a meaningful difference, it's just one that is to the detriment of everyone bar a handful of oligarchical wannabe godocrats.
societywasamistake@reddit
what was kamala’s plan to decrease emissions again?
justwalkingalonghere@reddit
It could not possibly have been worse than lowering emissions standards across the board
societywasamistake@reddit
i don’t think it was worse, that’s not what i said, but im curious bc as far as I’m aware it was also ‘drill baby drill’ eg pro-fracking and pro-oil, so I’m not sure why you’re assuming her supporters were ‘vehemently opposed’ to it, or why you’re assuming those who didn’t participate don’t care
frugalerthingsinlife@reddit
Btw, only 2 Presidents got more votes than "not giving a shit whatsoever" in the last century. Biden and I think the other was LBJ.
That 30/30/40 split is pretty close to the norm within a few percentage points.
mike-deadmonton@reddit
I am the 40 percent (not really Canadian).
I really hoped we could educate public and start a real plan to protect future generations.
I am old though, so disappointed in politics as solution, now checking out. Let son know sorry, we are screwed
calling_at_this_time@reddit
If we stopped all climate emissions we'd lose the aerosols currently shielding us from 1 degree of warming. So we'd hit 2.5 plus in a matter years.
Thats if we deleted every human on the planet this very second. As it is we're continuing to emit, increasing the base temperature that 1 degree will one day be added too.
Things like permafrost melt etc at the current temp are bad enough nevermind with the extra degree thats coming one day.
So yes, the AMOC will collapse regardless of what we do now. The only question is when
urlach3r@reddit
The Day After Tomorrow?
SeaOfBullshit@reddit
Yeah but then they didn't even do that, they just started going after everybody else's oil.
Seversevens@reddit
Plus in places like Omaha Nebraska they’re literally burning coal for power like it’s the 1870s
xeddyb@reddit
They burn coal for power in almost every state
Right-Cause9951@reddit
Climate change would have to have immediate consequences like driving wreckless on the road. Lifelong injury, death, major expenses, and possible jail time.
Even with those elements people willingly gamble with the situation but in general we make it through each driving duration.
Alex5173@reddit
If we stopped all emissions yesterday we'd still probably be looking at enough knock-on accelerative effects to doom us, we've got to figure out how to separate the carbon we've released from the CO2 (easy part) in such a way it can be stored like it was originally so that it doesn't oxidize again.
A revolution of carbon fiber products made from captured CO2 would be a good start but I'm not holding my breath.
KnowledgeMediocre404@reddit
AMOC collapse, coral reefs collapse and Arctic sea ice are all baked in where we already are.
duckonmuffin@reddit
Sorry won’t the Americans be absolutely fine with change? I thought that people in much further north Europe were ones going to suffer here.
It-s_Not_Important@reddit
Everybody suffers, west / north Europeans first.
duckonmuffin@reddit
The most northern big cities of North America are in line with southern Europe. People in Chicago are going to to be better set up for long harsh winters than people in Southern France.
I wonder if driving the Baltic will be thing.
jamesdukeiv@reddit
Rapid warming is already making living in the south of North America more expensive and more uncomfortable. Plants are behaving weirdly with the failure of winter to really happen last year. Spring storms are getting more violent. Extreme droughts and the disappearance of snow pack in the west. We’re feeling it already.
emmc47@reddit
You had unreasonable high hopes.
cbih@reddit
It was too late 100 years ago. Addressing climate change means destroying the world as we know it and letting billions die, which is about the same as doing nothing.
Exciting-Squash4444@reddit
How would billions die
Nepalus@reddit
Our population is entirely dependent on food production that is laden with carbon emissions. From the fertilizer, to the fuel to harvest and move it, the energy used to refrigerate, emissions from animals, etc. If you tried to de carbonize the processes, the end result every time is heavily reduced yields.
Then you have to start talking about energy production, travel capabilities, etc. Our population exploded on the back of stored energy from the sun in the form of petrochemicals.
neonium@reddit
Ya, but the idea it was too late 100 years ago is idiotic.
Unless you decide capitalism was inevitable once implemented once, gradual correction was very much possible back when we figured out climate change required it.
We've engaged in insane overconsumption for a century, decrease in yields while we figured out the new process wouldn't have really been the huge deal people make it out to be.
It's a bigger deal now that we have the population we do and dwindling energy reserves and we're so far into overshooting any sane carbon goals. Because even just beating peoples assets with sticks in NA until they stoped driving 4 times a day and insisting on needing little mansions in the 'burbs would be a huge endeavour.
But people massively underestimate how much of our emissions are totally avoidable, particularly if you look back. No one really needs to eat meat, no one needs a backyard 2% of people ever even use, no one needs a couple hundred pieces of plastic shit or disposable outfits replaced constantly.
The majority of the world's emissions have been stupid indulgences like that, either at the point of indulgence or as they where being produced and transported.
Even now, life's going to get so much worse, but if you scaled back overconsumption in painful ways and quickly moved to, say, cut all corn production for fuels in the US and moved to install enough solar to allow a legislated shutdown of all carbon power sources you'd have a masive impact on the world's tragectory, and would make surviving in the states as it happens completely different.
Ecological devastation for a lot of the population and biosphere are locked in, but humans surviving is still a pretty trivial problem for the scale of our abilities at this point. The problem is still just that even in the face of this pain we refuse to say no to selfish idiots that want to fly to Mexico or whatever instead of rebuilding the electrical grid and building out electrical rail at speed to ensure basic infrastructural needs are met as our resource and energy budget collapses.
Also, the food production thing is kind of a huge canard. Climate change is going to make it brutal soonish, but at the moment the crops that can replace meats, which improve soil quality, are easy to grow. We just grow them to feed to livestock, despite them having like a dozen other fantastic knock on effects from being less perishable, and so requiring less haste and energy to transport and store safely, to being genuinely better for human health, from what we can tell.
People wildly overestimate how much of our being fucked was and is locked in, instead of just allowing dipshits to insist the sun shines out of their ass because they take "risks" under capitalism to insists that exposing them to risks is tantamount to genocide and so we all must die so that business logic allows them to stay rich.
Literally, most of why our species is fucked not for physics reasons but because we've already invested in bad infrastructure that uses polluting means, and we treat predictable returns as more sacrosanct than human life. I can't express many of the solutions to this problem under Reddits rules, but it can't be overstated how artificial and easy this is to solve. You can in fact tell rich trash they now own nothing but the personal property they use at home and just write off a ton of bad investments as a society.
Pain and suffering is locked in, particularly for the innocent species we've fucked over and the lowest emissions humans. Survival is still pretty trivial, contingent on us just actually trying to survive though, tbh.
BabadookishOnions@reddit
If we are going to decarbonise agriculture and reduce yields then absolutely we will be needing people to have space to grow food at home
Nepalus@reddit
I want you to imagine that you have been given the authority to set government policy for the United States and you are about to give a live address to deliver the changes you want to make.
You list out all of the reforms you want to make. Radically reduced consumption, major lifestyle adjustments, complete energy system overhaul, rapid economic reform/system change, and the cherry on top is that there’s no opting out, these changes are going to be enforced by the federal government.
You would basically upend the entire country and there would be immediate mass protests and violence. Because what you are basically saying is “All of your dreams for the future are dead, all of your work has been for nothing, subsidence farming is your only real future for the good of the planet”. You would probably be assassinated.
This won’t happen because it ignores how people and systems actually behave.
Forcing huge lifestyle cuts would trigger massive backlash. Democracies don’t vote for that, and major countries won’t coordinate anyway.
You also can’t shut down fossil fuels and rebuild everything overnight without crashing the economy.
It’s not just elites either. Regular people are tied to this system and won’t accept losing their standard of living.
The scale and speed required has never existed and there’s no realistic path to it.
TheOtherHobbes@reddit
People are going to lose their "standard of living" anyway.
That's the point. There is no business-as-usual option. The costs are incoming, and if they're handled in a controlled way they will be handled in catastrophic collapse.
The "greater good" is only nebulous if you lack the education to see what's already started and will be accelerating year by year from now on.
smackson@reddit
"Bend not break".
Possible? Still time? Not sure.
ChromaticStrike@reddit
No, we have to start talking about energy, agriculture is not an issue for co2 emission in comparison to the rest
https://www.wri.org/insights/4-charts-explain-greenhouse-gas-emissions-countries-and-sectors
The issue with agriculture is the impact on the fauna and the soil. It's a direct environment and health problematic. There are better place to get carbon cut from.
Nepalus@reddit
I'm sorry I didn't comprehensively address everything in a single Reddit post, my bad.
Also this graph is misleading. There's overlap between the different sources that they don't account for. I would say this is a more accurate representation.
Further still, we have to address every issue all at once because it all compounds on each other. The food supply enables our population growth, our population growth furthers our consumption, our consumption furthers our carbon expenditure, our carbon expenditure enables our food supply... so on and so on.
But let's just even look at the United States.
If you tried to run the entire U.S. on renewables, the scale gets wild fast:
Storage is the real kicker:
Then infrastructure:
And you still need reliability:
On top of all of this it will take decades to implement.
You're talking realistically the better part of a century.
New transmission lines currently already take 10–15 years to approve and build. We would have to take our entire infrastructure we built out over a century, rip it out, reconfigure it, figure out how produce effective battery storage, get all of this the all the government red tape at the federal to local level, ensure funding doesn't shift between presidential terms, etc.
Finally, this is just the United States. All it takes is India, Brazil, etc saying that they're going to just continue burning fossil fuels and our entire restructuring will basically amount to nothing. We will continue to shoot past all carbon estimates and the worst scenarios will be locked in anyway. Even if we did everything we could as a nation.
ChromaticStrike@reddit
The graph change the numbers and still proves we have other sectors easier to deal with first instead of hitting in a highly sensible one.
US is a major contributor to the global warming, "just the US" is not working there, you can't solve the problem without pushing back their emissions specifically with China.
You should not run the entire country on renewable, it's a disingenuous answer, nuclear power-renewable combo is the only answer for modern high energy consumption countries atm.
Exciting-Squash4444@reddit
Thank you for explaining!
It-s_Not_Important@reddit
We don’t have the infrastructure to instantly switch everybody over to clean energy and sustainable farming. So an instant and unforgiving requirement that all food and energy be produced in a particular manner starves some, freezes others, and sees some die of heat stroke.
Aegongrey@reddit
When London decided to plunder Iran and subsequently the ME in the early twentieth century for oil, it accelerated the global catastrophe cycle, paving the way for construction of 90 percent of our infrastructure (and allowed for extreme global population growth). Had we not decided to exploit oil for energy and left it in the ground, our lives would be much simpler, but we’d also have far less collapse related features. They will look back and characterize the Anthropocene as the time of mass petroleum psychosis.
Bipogram@reddit
Over a century or two, that's not an unlikely figure if we allow BAU to continue.
Wet-bulb events, water shortages, wars, etc. All can be attributed to climate change via the various stressors.
Bipogram@reddit
Nothing short of high-order magic allows us to both remove the additional heat that has been added to the upper oceanic water in the last century *and* sequester 100ppm of CO2 from the atmosphere.
And we're fresh out of wizards.
duckonmuffin@reddit
I don’t know. Everyone going vegan 20 years ago probably would have done it.
Bipogram@reddit
Not enough.
Global single child policy in the 50s, no international travel, strong pivot to fission, and far fewer plastics - maybe....
duckonmuffin@reddit
Only 20%. lol ok dude.
Bipogram@reddit
That's what the great god google tells me. "CO2 production animal farming"
Happy to hear other views.
duckonmuffin@reddit
“Only 20%”. Maybe think a tad harder about this.
Google is your god lol.
collapse-ModTeam@reddit
Rule 1: In addition to enforcing Reddit's content policy, we will also remove comments and content that is abusive or predatory in nature. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Bipogram@reddit
Well, as it directed me to peer-reviewed sources, I welcome your thoughts.
And it seems my irony failed to be communicated.
Sic transit gloria etc.
duckonmuffin@reddit
20% of global emissions is absolutely huge alone is what I am getting at.
But you would add to this, the fact that plants need much less space means there would be more land for forest and the food source plants themselves would preform sequestration. It could have basically made climate change a non event.
Maybe Google the term ecology. See what your god has to say on that.
Bipogram@reddit
So instead of reaching 400ppm at end of century, it would take a decade or two more.
Crucially, we need to be below pre-60s CO2 emission rates for natural uptake to reduce P_CO2.
We're currently at 200%. Moving to 180% of prior-to-60s guarantees the same outcome, but delayed by a decade or so.
No need for sarcasm.
neonium@reddit
Your math makes me want to defenestrate myself. No wonder we're fucked, arithmetic is beyond people.
Really should have just stoped while you where ahead.
Bipogram@reddit
We emit, GHG emission-wise, at a rate x2 what we did 50 years ago.
Animal husbandry is 15 to 20% of our current rate.
Yes, I was in error.
Removing that sector brings our emission rate to 160 to 170% of the 70's.
I'll leave my mistake up, and ask you to not hurl yourself from a window.
But we are indeed fucked.
Mmillefolium@reddit
no international travel sigh. the common ethos is: it's success to go on multiple spontaneous international excursions (Joseph is in the Mediterranean swimming with dolphins for a few days wouldnt you want to do that?) and im worthy of pity for not acquiring such a lifestyle. surrounded by fucking idiots. depressing. the degree of required lifestyle change is way beyond the imagination of that average citizen in my observations. im burnt out from activism, I'm tired of the rat race. see you in the garden.. i should rig up my rain barrel.
PennysWorthOfTea@reddit
Or, rather, imagine if, 50-75 years ago, the top 100-200 corporations had been reigned in & not allowed to freely exploit the world's resources.
We gotta stop framing these catastrophes as a failure of individuals & start assigning blame to the actual architects of our dystopia. The choice is either blame literally billions of people who are trapped in this capitalistic nightmare which they have essentially zero control over or hold a couple hundred corporations accountable for their apathy over the destruction & devastation they cause for the benefit of shareholder portfolios.
Glittering_Film_6833@reddit
So as a Brit, will I need thermal underwear or A/C?
Celestial_Mechanica@reddit
You will starve before you freeze.
BoxOfUsefulParts@reddit
I have both. I think I will need them.
Longjumping_Share444@reddit
I'm not sure we know exactly. This is one of the big bad things that could happen that got trotted out to scare everyone into line.
vinegar@reddit
First one, then the other
Orange_Indelebile@reddit
Sure all of Northern Europe will turn into an ice cube. But in the plus side this might still or slow down sea level rise and block the northern sea rout, and some of the methane trapped in permafrost might stay trapped. That plus all the climate catastrophe will disrupt the economy and population growth so much that it might give us a second chance without killing us all.
Hilda-Ashe@reddit
I'm in my 40s, how do you expect me to address that?
Longjumping_Share444@reddit
More of a collective 'we', as in mankind. We've known that climate change could result in this since the 90s.
mossyskeleton@reddit
Are there models showing what climate and sea levels would be like around the globe if this happens?
emmc47@reddit
Oh well 🤷🏾♂️
Disastrous-Swim7406@reddit
Imminent on human scale or earth scale? lol
leathery_bread@reddit
Elevated_Dongers@reddit
Do you think they would tell is if a collapse was really imminent? Or would certain people try to control the narrative to avoid a panic
Portalrules123@reddit (OP)
Yep, the title on the actual site is clickbaity as hell, this is an important distinction to note.
Distinguishedflyer@reddit
BOE seems way worse to me... and it's not getting any airtime.
Grinagh@reddit
Venus by Tuesday
bodybyxbox@reddit
At least we know we aren't the only intelligent life in the universe, because we are idiots.
Distinguishedflyer@reddit
we're worse than idiots, we are cruel and venal.
kingrobin@reddit
"A person is intelligent. People ... are stupid."
ChromaticStrike@reddit
Maybe they welcome us all...
Potential-Profit1151@reddit
What does this mean? I've seen it 3 times now across 3 different threads and searching the web was no help.
Grinagh@reddit
It's a reference to how fast climate change is occurring now at an exponential rate and how the earth will be Venus soon due to treating our atmosphere like an open sewer
Potential-Profit1151@reddit
Thankyou. Is Tuesday used like as in "prepping for Tuesday."?
terrierhead@reddit
Nope. Prepping for Tuesday” means being prepared for ordinary things to go wrong, like losing power for days after a storm. “Venus by Tuesday” means everything is going “faster than expected,” and that we are proper fucked.
Grinagh@reddit
Not sure
boomaDooma@reddit
President Not Sure?
Kaining@reddit
there is nothing to prepare for. Venus is as deadly as it can be. Once it's done, there's just accepting your fate and be ok that instead of putting sociopath and pedophile in prisons, we let them run the world to the ground for as long as humanity can remember.
Loose-Jaguar-8175@reddit
I think it means "on a sooner timeline than predicted"
vinegar@reddit
Just a fun thing we say to keep the horror at bay
Ok_Main3273@reddit
There is also a 'Wasteland by Wednesday' meme. Check out the eponymous website and YouTube channel, run by a prepper named Kris.
acatinasweater@reddit
A few years ago there was an alarmist here who gained something of a following called fishmahboi. This was one of their catch phrases.
Conscious_Broccoli64@reddit
Brent oil collapse Tuesday and cannibalism on Thursday
keeprunning23@reddit
I hope everything collapses and we all die soon, it'd be helpful, I want only that I see the collapse of all life on the planet first for the next millions of years, then I'd be happiest. I hope really that no knowable life in the universe can exist going forward. That's my true goal.
LatzeH@reddit
Inaccurate title.
switchsk8r@reddit
not really important, but I thought this meant the sahel will get greener?
MechaStewart@reddit
The heat death of the universe is immenent too I suppose.
: /
YoSoyZarkMuckerberg@reddit
what impacts will this have on Australia?
Bipogram@reddit
Have you read On The Beach?
YoSoyZarkMuckerberg@reddit
Nah. Should I?
Bipogram@reddit
Well, it's fiction and outdated but does legitimately describe how global effects percolate between hemispheres.
Mind, I was being a tad flippant.
The real answer is I don't know - but it undoubtedly would disturb the global heat transfer process that shifts warm equatorial water to the N. pole. By how much? Dumno.
BoxOfUsefulParts@reddit
Everything west of Adelaide will be a sea. You get to keep the bit in the middle.
YoSoyZarkMuckerberg@reddit
west of Adelaide??
BoxOfUsefulParts@reddit
The sea will come into the western desert first. I'd want to be in the middle bit.
TOKEN616@reddit
Well thats us here in ireland fucked. Cheers world
ThePiderman@reddit
The article does not lay out anything remotely close to what the title seems to imply. Terrible, terrible title.
ShyElf@reddit
The observations are already past the point where the model has an unambiguous tipping point, and are rapidly accelerating, as model does near the tipping point, with a new observed high by a significant margin in 2024. No, by imminent they don't literally mean next Tuesday. I'm not sure what you're expecting.
One thing to keep in mind is that prior to tipping at model year 390 or so, the model year is just a proxy for the very slowly changing forcing.
The point which hasn't been made is that this proxy in the model gives a sharper and clearer indication of the tipping point than the actual AMOC, which in models is easily observable, but is relatively hard to measure in reality. It flips in around 10 years, as opposed to around 20 for the AMOC. It moreover relies on surface observables, for which observed data is readily available in near realtime. This would be a good thing to watch here, like we do ocean SSTs.
thedirkfiddler@reddit
Yeah, most models still give us decades?
ThePiderman@reddit
Well, this article does not make any assessment as to when it might happen, only that once (if) the Gulf Stream collapses, the AMOC might eventually go, too. The article does not claim high confidence in this likelihood, or the timing of such events.
FaithInTechnology@reddit
you guys found the article?
DashingDino@reddit
Agreed
digiorno@reddit
But for a brief moment in time the people who owned and sold oil were able to enjoy immense wealth.
IceOnTitan@reddit
Dead species walking
ClassicallyBrained@reddit
Alright, everybody calm down. This is a bad article. It's basically fear mongering. This is sensationalized beyond absurdity.
The actual report scientists are "warning" about is based on a new model, not real life. And that model shows a collapse FAR into the future. In fact, this might be one of the most conservative estimates I've seen of a potential AMOC collapse.
dustinjames23@reddit
Please sir send me a pm on how I can get me head so far up my a s s as you. Thank you for your attention this matter 🙏
KiaKatt1@reddit
Then in the very next sentence/paragraph, it goes on to say that it is using an idealized scenario meant to explore relationships to discover what warning signs we should watch for.
> To be clear, the study is not claiming the real AMOC will collapse in 400 years. This is an idealized scenario meant to explore how the system behaves and what warning signs might show up.
ClassicallyBrained@reddit
Right. Basically the only real conclusion you could pull from this report is that MAYBE you could expect to see a rapid shift of the Gulf Stream prior to a potential collapse. All this based on a very dubious model to begin with.
Portalrules123@reddit (OP)
SS: First of all, note that I slightly changed the title to be less clickbaity, the original said “which MEANS an ocean current collapse is imminent” which doesn’t accurately portray the study’s findings, it’s not quite that certain.
But anyways, related to the science behind climate and ocean current collapse as researchers have used various data sources and models to estimate that a weakening AMOC would cause the Gulf Stream to gradually shift north, and then suddenly shift hundreds of kilometres north within a few years soon before total AMOC collapse. And if you look at historic measurements, the Gulf Stream has indeed been slowly drifting northwards over the last few decades, supporting the hypothesis that the AMOC is indeed weakening. If scientists ever observe a sudden acceleration in this shift in the future it could be a warning sign that the AMOC is close to total collapse. Such a collapse would cause shifting rainfall patterns leading to desertification of the Sahel and further collapse of the Amazon, a possible accelerated rise in sea level on the U.S. east coast, and a reduction in the ocean’s ability to sequester heat and carbon. Keep a close eye on news about the AMOC and the Gulf Stream in the future, and expect climate chaos to be widespread if a sudden shift is observed.
johannesfranco13@reddit
Why didn't you mention that AMOC collapse will affect Europe too
smackson@reddit
No mention of northern Europe going from liveable to unsurvivably cold?
Captain_Pink_Pants@reddit
So... not a fan, I take it...
ChromaticStrike@reddit
Is that why we got an unusual cold wave in Europe? GS is usually bringing warm from South in the Western coast.
specialsymbol@reddit
I don't believe it until I see it happen.
jbond23@reddit
"Imminent" may be "Faster Than Expected", but how many centuries is that?
Pathfinder-electron@reddit
Imminent like it’s tomorrow
EsseoS@reddit
I’m only 25 man :(
joyrideboo@reddit
From the article : This research doesn’t prove a collapse is imminent, and it doesn’t give a clean countdown clock. What it does offer is a clearer connection between deep-ocean weakening and a surface feature we can monitor continuously.
Anxious_Gift_7125@reddit
Inshallah something will end this nightmare fast no matter what it is
Bipogram@reddit
We will be the end of this.
Unfortunately, and not in a good way.
FrVincentVattoli@reddit
No more turning back now, I guess?
Bipogram@reddit
That's not been an option for decades.
notjordansime@reddit
does this mean better or worse skiing??
asking 4 a friend who rlly likes skiing
👁️👄👁️
Mostest_Importantest@reddit
Well, I'd say we're about treble-stuffed farked, but if I'm wrong, in another week, I won't be.
Still, while the environment is gonna have her last laugh, currently Americans get to play "which will crumble first?" with current best guesses including economy, healthcare, education, military, and *checks notes* sports/school bathroom attendance policies.
Hypercapnia is coming for us all.
ToiIetGhost@reddit
I had to look up hypercapnia, so just in case anyone else needs it:
Hypercapnia - abnormally elevated carbon dioxide levels in the blood. Also known as hypercarbia.
peepsforme@reddit
Thank you!
DummyAccount4ADumbo@reddit
To add just a bit more context against the article's lede-burying, here's the closing sentence of the actual academic article:
van Westen's academic focus of late seems to be the AMOC, based on the series of recent publications under their name which all involve it, so for anyone with university access to these sorts of journals, this might be a name worth keeping a tab on for collapse-related reasons.
Ill_Station_6165@reddit
“To be clear, the study is not claiming the real AMOC will collapse in 400 years. This is an idealized scenario meant to explore how the system behaves and what warning signs might show up.”
Well I’m sure they’ll get around to fixing it by then.
DashingDino@reddit
That's not what the article says...
PeaOk5697@reddit
Like winters aren't cold enough here in Norway. Now we risk getting colder summers to. Fuck this
verstohlen@reddit
It was bound to happen sooner or later.
Portalrules123@reddit (OP)
Happy cake day :)
verstohlen@reddit
Thanks man!
Wonderful-Bag-1103@reddit
Nature bats last
RichieLT@reddit
And she’s winding up.
StatementBot@reddit
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Portalrules123:
SS: First of all, note that I slightly changed the title to be less clickbaity, the original said “which MEANS an ocean current collapse is imminent” which doesn’t accurately portray the study’s findings, it’s not quite that certain.
But anyways, related to the science behind climate and ocean current collapse as researchers have used various data sources and models to estimate that a weakening AMOC would cause the Gulf Stream to gradually shift north, and then suddenly shift hundreds of kilometres north within a few years soon before total AMOC collapse. And if you look at historic measurements, the Gulf Stream has indeed been slowly drifting northwards over the last few decades, supporting the hypothesis that the AMOC is indeed weakening. If scientists ever observe a sudden acceleration in this shift in the future it could be a warning sign that the AMOC is close to total collapse. Such a collapse would cause shifting rainfall patterns leading to desertification of the Sahel and further collapse of the Amazon, a possible accelerated rise in sea level on the U.S. east coast, and a reduction in the ocean’s ability to sequester heat and carbon. Keep a close eye on news about the AMOC and the Gulf Stream in the future, and expect climate chaos to be widespread if a sudden shift is observed.
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1sbs4tp/scientists_warn_that_the_gulf_stream_is_shifting/oe5pre5/
Hvac306@reddit
I’ve seen this movie before….. I don’t want to be running from wolves on an iceberg of ship…. 😞
psychetropica1@reddit
Well, I guess our energy slaves will be set free soon. 🫴🏽🦋
Dumbassahedratr0n@reddit
Sighs and takes out bingo card
Chill_Panda@reddit
Well, I’ll enjoy the UK being a coke Canadian winter with feet of snow for a while before the planet becomes unlovable
flriverlivin@reddit
Next ice age should be up to bat anyway...