Atlantic Ocean circulation is weakest in at least 1,600 years ( 2/26/21 ) .

[honeeagle]

I always keep in the back of my mind ,we are coming out of a ice age.Lake Erie shoreline (where I Live) is rebounding at a rate of 1/4 inch a year, due to a mile of ice coming off us a very short time ago (geologically speaking)
Learned that before we went metric.

 

[4WD]

I wonder how they measured circulation 1600 years ago?

 

[twouvakind]

Cue the locusts.

 

[sloinker]

The bias against science is what is strange. Science evolves as newer and more accurate data is factored in. Sea currents stopping presages nothing good for mankind in geological time. I'm surprised by how many otherwise technically minded people on this board allow their politics and confirmation bias to interfere with what should be given careful consideration. How can that be? It's snowing in Texas....duh,

 

[4WD]

The bias against science is what is strange. Science evolves as newer and more accurate data is factored in. Sea currents stopping presages nothing good for mankind in geological time. I'm surprised by how many otherwise technically minded people on this board allow their politics and confirmation bias to interfere with what should be given careful consideration. How can that be? It's snowing in Texas....duh,

Up until a couple weeks ago your post would draw a lock.
The Texas freeze stuff here has allowed lots of political comments …
Maybe that’s a form of bias here too …

 

[2strokeNorthstar]

The bias against science is what is strange. Science evolves as newer and more accurate data is factored in. Sea currents stopping presages nothing good for mankind in geological time. I'm surprised by how many otherwise technically minded people on this board allow their politics and confirmation bias to interfere with what should be given careful consideration. Global warming/Climate change? How can that be? It's snowing in Texas....duh,

Not biased against all science. Just there is a lack of trust because of the constant bias and knowingly publishing false information just to secure funding for the next bogus study. Real unbiased science is always interesting.

 

[sloinker]

Peer review of estimable sources establishes credibility. Keep that in mind when weighing evidence for support of contrary beliefs. The people making claims need to bring the proof, so far I am satisfied that the evidence is maturing in the matter of prediction.

 

[sloinker]

Up until a couple weeks ago your post would draw a lock.
The Texas freeze stuff here has allowed lots of political comments …
Maybe that’s a form of bias here too …

I wasn't trying to disparage Texas, only pointing out how micro events shouldn't weigh too heavily in macro situations.

 

[4WD]

I wasn't trying to disparage Texas, only pointing out how micro events shouldn't weigh too heavily in macro situations.

Understand … but thought this topic has been locked here in the past because it’s so often drug around on a political leash (by both sides) …

 

[MolaKule]

Let's try and keep this non-political but technical. That means no mention of AGW or GCC, Evolution, or similar topics.

 

[MolaKule]

The bias against science is what is strange. Science evolves as newer and more accurate data is factored in. Sea currents stopping presages nothing good for mankind in geological time. I'm surprised by how many otherwise technically minded people on this board allow their politics and confirmation bias to interfere with what should be given careful consideration. How can that be? It's snowing in Texas....duh,

I don't see any 'bias" against the scientific method..

By ‘science’ we refer to the method of testing claims by observation and experimentation, or the body of knowledge acquired by such a method. Testability by repeatable observation and experimentation is a key characteristic of science. So, we must ask of the claims of any model, which of them have been observationally or experimentally demonstrated to actually support the model?

What I do see is a pushback against agenda-driven science, and a pushback against organizations that will not print papers that present evidence contradicting those prevailing orthodox theories.

 

[gregk24]

Science

 

[ripcord]

^^^ This! (MolaKule's post)

When the New York Times declares that "the science is settled," it passes beyond the realm of science and becomes "orthodoxy." That is the exact opposite of science.

 

[Pelican]

The earth’s climate is made up of a huge number of interconnected and interdependent hydrodynamic and thermodynamic systems which by their nature are ever changing. It’s when things stop changing that I’ll start to worry.

P.S. I’m not saying let’s all go be ***** and cut off our catalytic converters, roll-coal, and dump our used oil in the storm drain or anything but I just don’t buy into all this alarmist reporting.

I'd venture to say that 99.9% of the "greens" have never heard of the 'Milankovic Cycles"

 

[4WD]

^^^ This! (MolaKule's post)

When the New York Times declares that "the science is settled," it passes beyond the realm of science and becomes "orthodoxy." That is the exact opposite of science.

Consensus is not science

 

[ripcord]

Consensus is not science

This is why "peer review" is a poor argument for validity when a field is highly politicized and big bucks are driving the agenda.

 

[Rhymingmechanic]

The Scientific American article linked by Quattro Pete actually covers two 2018 studies. Here's the other one: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0006-5

For those wondering how they measured ocean currents all those years ago, here's the answer.

"Thornalley and his colleagues used sediment cores collected from the ocean floor along the U.S. east coast to reveal how deep ocean currents linked to the AMOC [Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation] have changed over time; stronger currents deposit larger grains of sediment. They also looked at tiny creatures fossilized in sediment cores—some of which had thrived in colder conditions, others in warmer ones—to see how ocean temperatures changed as the AMOC waxed and waned in strength."

 

[ripcord]

The Scientific American article linked by Quattro Pete actually covers two 2018 studies. Here's the other one: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0006-5

For those wondering how they measured ocean currents all those years ago, here's the answer.

"Thornalley and his colleagues used sediment cores collected from the ocean floor along the U.S. east coast to reveal how deep ocean currents linked to the AMOC [Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation] have changed over time; stronger currents deposit larger grains of sediment. They also looked at tiny creatures fossilized in sediment cores—some of which had thrived in colder conditions, others in warmer ones—to see how ocean temperatures changed as the AMOC waxed and waned in strength."

So they based their estimates off of wildly imprecise guesstimates.

 

[MolaKule]

The Scientific American article linked by Quattro Pete actually covers two 2018 studies. Here's the other one: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0006-5

For those wondering how they measured ocean currents all those years ago, here's the answer.

"Thornalley and his colleagues used sediment cores collected from the ocean floor along the U.S. east coast to reveal how deep ocean currents linked to the AMOC [Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation] have changed over time; stronger currents deposit larger grains of sediment. They also looked at tiny creatures fossilized in sediment cores—some of which had thrived in colder conditions, others in warmer ones—to see how ocean temperatures changed as the AMOC waxed and waned in strength."

Just curious, is there any mention anywhere in the paper for the theory of natural cyclic variations verses the supposed contributions by modern man?

Secondly, how could anyone know what these fossilized creatures "preferred" in terms of their environment before internment? Could these fossilized creatures have not simply and naturally adapted to their environments before fossilization?

What we have here is supposition based upon prior supposition - ad infinitum. I.e., they are assuming one theory supports another theory higher up the hypothetical chain when no single theory in the chain can stand on its own.

 

[PimTac]

The earth is evolving as it has since the beginning. We are just on it for the ride. Humans and animals adapt to the evolution. Ocean currents change, weather patterns change. They will continue to change no matter what we do.