A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation • Hacker News Board

Re: A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

#141

Post by mikub » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 6:07 PM UTC

barbazoo wrote: post #112

oceanthrowaway wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me this is the great utility of the IPCC reports. If you look at the full report you can find subsections on many aspects of climate change and a discussion of the state of the field complete with citations compiled by an expert.

How would a layperson like myself judge what's in the IPCC report? The predictions are so dramatic that we have to act now and can't wait and see how it turns out. How is it different from this submission here?

There is a great podcast that goes through the whole IPCC report in something like 70 episodes. It's in german though, so not quiet sure how helpfull it could be for you, but maybee there is something similar in english. The podcast mentioned is "https://dasklima.podigee.io/" . Discussion about IPCC goes on until episode 77, after that they discuss some broader topics.

Re: A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

#142

Post by MrOwnPut » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 6:07 PM UTC

Fricken wrote: post #110

RandomLensman wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are challenges to overcome but thinking of the future as dystopia can be counterproductive.

Kind of an irrelevant point to make. We're setting new emissions records, so nothing so far has been productive.

Who is "we"? The US has reduced emissions records while increasing energy output for a number of years now.

Europe has increased both, regardless of their rhetoric. China of course has increased both as well with more coal plants being built.

Most of the reduction in the US is thanks to fracking/nat.gas displacing coal. Which a lot of people are against.

Focusing on nuclear could get us a lot farther in displacing fossil fuels with nuclear as the baseline energy source.

Unfortunately most people just want to nag each other or cat-o’-nine-tails themselves or yell doomsday on loop instead of pushing for things that actually matter.

Re: A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

#143

Post by sfn42 » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 6:09 PM UTC

MrOwnPut wrote: post #132

sfn42 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, everything that's been predicted for decades is happening but it could just be a total coincidence. And if it isn't I'm sure they'll just magically figure out economically viable fusion or spray some aerosols into the atmosphere or somehow just magically fix everything. I'm sure everything will be fine. That's why I'm not having kids. /s

[flagged]

If by "they" you mean thermometers, sure. I don't need to do anything more than look at temperature readings to see how the climate is changing.

I also see that it's clearly an exponential graph. We've already reached the 1.5 degree threshold the Paris Agreement was supposed to avoid, we have done fuck all to avoid it. The next 1.5 degrees will come much faster and the next 1.5 after that faster still. At that point we're 4.5 degrees above the baseline and that's widely regarded as apocalyptic.

We will see famine, water scarcity, mass migration, probably wars, possibly nuclear war.

If you want to bring a child into that world go ahead. I wouldn't want to be born into it so I won't.

Re: A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

#144

Post by jacquesm » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 6:10 PM UTC

bjourne wrote: post #134

Biologist123 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a lay-bystander to the climate debate, I get a little spooked when I see comments like this. Like 99.9% of people, the science of complex climate systems is beyond me as are the de facto black box models that project climate change. Instead I use “appears in a credible journal” as a basis for trusting the apparent direction of travel and I’m disconcerted when I see that proxy challenged. I also, I am somewhat sorr…

Look at it this way. The link to the article appeared on HN 15:59:54. braaannigan's comment appeared on 17:07:56. Thus, it took this HN user not more than 60 minutes to conclude that this article is of low quality and should not have been published in Nature. Nature's editors, the article's authors, and its peer reviewers disagree. braaannigan is anonymous and do not put their reputation on the line. Nature's editors…

Liam may be anonymous to you but he's not to me, he's also not anonymous on HN (he posts under a very close and obvious variation of his real name here) but apparently doesn't go out of his way to 'build a brand' or 'attract a following'. He really is what he says he is. Maybe tone it down a bit, especially because you are anonymous and apparently believe that is important?

Re: A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

#145

Post by ke88y » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 6:11 PM UTC

bjourne wrote: post #134

Biologist123 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a lay-bystander to the climate debate, I get a little spooked when I see comments like this. Like 99.9% of people, the science of complex climate systems is beyond me as are the de facto black box models that project climate change. Instead I use “appears in a credible journal” as a basis for trusting the apparent direction of travel and I’m disconcerted when I see that proxy challenged. I also, I am somewhat sorr…

Look at it this way. The link to the article appeared on HN 15:59:54. braaannigan's comment appeared on 17:07:56. Thus, it took this HN user not more than 60 minutes to conclude that this article is of low quality and should not have been published in Nature. Nature's editors, the article's authors, and its peer reviewers disagree. braaannigan is anonymous and do not put their reputation on the line. Nature's editors…

The article was posted to arxiv in April. Believe it or not, >99% of the time I see a paper from my field on HN I've read it months before it's posted, and sometimes been aware of the research for up to a year before it's posted.

Also, the criticism is primarily a comment on methods (stats vs physical models) which can be based on lots of consideration and experience outside the context of any particular paper.

E.g. I can tell you that you've probably used the wrong optimization algorithm for particular task without spending much more than an hour glancing through your problem formulation and results. Doing that without the benefit of decades of experience would require weeks or months, but with experience I can make that determination quite quickly given a detailed write-up.

(FWIW: I think dynamical physics-based models are probably over-emphasized in climate science consensus, but I'm admittedly a complete novice whose opinion you shouldn't trust.)

Re: A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

#146

Post by DanHulton » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 6:12 PM UTC

bjourne wrote: post #134

Biologist123 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a lay-bystander to the climate debate, I get a little spooked when I see comments like this. Like 99.9% of people, the science of complex climate systems is beyond me as are the de facto black box models that project climate change. Instead I use “appears in a credible journal” as a basis for trusting the apparent direction of travel and I’m disconcerted when I see that proxy challenged. I also, I am somewhat sorr…

Look at it this way. The link to the article appeared on HN 15:59:54. braaannigan's comment appeared on 17:07:56. Thus, it took this HN user not more than 60 minutes to conclude that this article is of low quality and should not have been published in Nature. Nature's editors, the article's authors, and its peer reviewers disagree. braaannigan is anonymous and do not put their reputation on the line. Nature's editors…

> If appeal to authority is a valid argument

Well, thankfully it is not.

There's no need for one side or the other to "win," especially at this point. Instead, likely, debate will continue until a more-nuanced view is better understood and accurately disseminated.

(Not necessarily a view "in the middle." Sometimes one side is just Right, Full Stop. But a more-nuanced view when there's strong disagreement on both sides is usually helpful for more people to understand _why_ there's disagreement.)

Re: A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

#147

Post by Mordisquitos » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 6:12 PM UTC

philipkglass wrote: post #106

snowwrestler wrote: post #48

One of the predictions related to global warming that seems to surprise people is that most of the predicted sea level rise is attributed to the thermal expansion of warmer sea water. So when we think about major changes in how the ocean absorbs and distributes heat, we’re also thinking about how sea level will change in certain areas vs others. If the ocean starts storing a lot more heat around Cuba than Great Brita…

I don't think that is true. The oceans around Cuba and Great Britain are not separate bodies of water. Volumetric expansion from heating gets flattened out across all connected bodies of water by gravity. You could see differences of geography in how much different lakes expand, though.

I don't know. Consider that a given mass of water would undergo the same gravitational force regardless of whether it is colder/denser/smaller/lower or whether it is hotter/less-dense/larger/higher. Also, as an analogy, consider how much the tidal range [0] varies between areas of the ocean which are absolutely connected as a single body of water. Note particularly the contrast between tides in the Mediterranean and the Atlantic Ocean at large on each side of the Iberian Peninsula, even though they are totally connected through the Straight of Gibraltar.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_range

Re: A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

#148

Post by olddustytrail » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 6:12 PM UTC

mschild wrote: post #103

Terretta wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The terms "imminent" and "predict the time" seem like missing the point of the article you acknowledged you have only skimmed. I felt the article was clear collapse is not imminent, not even in this century. I felt it noted focus was not on imminence, but on changes worth mentioning in aspects of interest. Perhaps the difference is this article is talking of timing for transitions of significance, rather than the for…

It's mentions a potential collapse as early as 2025. More precisely 2025-2095. That is this century and it's accurate to say 2025 is imminent.

Yes, but I - and probably you - will die sometime between 2025 and 2095. I wouldn't say that therefore our deaths are imminent.

Re: A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

#149

Post by ceejayoz » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 6:13 PM UTC

boondoggle16 wrote: post #133

digdugdirk wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, actually the truth. The climate change "hype" comes from journalists and editors. The actual research papers are generally very conservative in their estimations, and we've been exceeding the predicted outcomes for decades without making any real changes to improve our situation.

[flagged]

What specific problems have historically been made better by "hanging all the journalists"?

Re: A forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation

#150

Post by refulgentis » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 6:16 PM UTC

godelski wrote: post #121

Biologist123 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a lay-bystander to the climate debate, I get a little spooked when I see comments like this. Like 99.9% of people, the science of complex climate systems is beyond me as are the de facto black box models that project climate change. Instead I use “appears in a credible journal” as a basis for trusting the apparent direction of travel and I’m disconcerted when I see that proxy challenged. I also, I am somewhat sorr…

> Question for the community: how does one navigate such uncertainty? Not climate scientist, but researcher in ML (another highly hyped and arguably more noisy field). After Bourbon, the hard truth is expertise + don't. Unfortunately journals/conferences/venues are an extremely noisy mechanism which in general aren't realistically much better than arxiv (at least over here). Peer review isn't journals/conferences, it…

Can you explain what Bourbon is? People are making one-off references to it but I can't find a search query that results in anything relevant to climate or scientific scandals