The guy, Dave Borlace from "Just have a think",mentions how the co-author, Alexandro Silvano of the study from Barcelona made an alarmist headline which the study didn't actually support. The headline went the world over on social media and probably after some critic, the lead author changed the headline. Dave says it was probably just a good old fashioned cock-up, yet considering that a colleague to the study says that they are afraid of spending cuts to their research and how important it is to observed these changes, then to me, it sounds more like deliberate alarmist headline to support their research which kow-tows to the AGW agenda.
In the article which
@iamthatis posted Willie Eschenbach does a fair job pulling the alarmist part out of the paper.
Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach Every so often, the climate media machine spits out a headline so breathless you’d think the laws of physics had just been accidentally repealed by a badly-worded ex…
wattsupwiththat.com
The study doesn’t mention “tipping point,” “collapse,” “current reversal,” “Southern Ocean current” or even “overturning circulation.” The only “reversal” in the paper refers to satellites detecting a reversal in surface salinity trends from decreasing to increasing, not a reversal in the the direction of the Southern ocean’s most complex circulation shown above.
So importantly the study didn't a reversal of the SMOC, just a reversal in the salinity trends from decreasing to increasing based on satellite data starting in 2008-2009. 15 years is a very short period on which to base predictions for the future apart from the question as to how reliable are those satellite measurements and how reliable are the computer models which the raw data the satellites pick up.
Paul Beckwith is a climate alarmist and
made a prediction in 2013 that the Arctic would be icefree that year.
Then he plays a bit with AI to analyze possible consequences. His intuition tells him that the SMOC breakdown already had consequences on the AMOC. An unstable polar vortex and increasing extreme climate events will now be the norm, making the current events look mild:
So when he, Paul Beckwith takes the paper from Barcelona and apparently runs with the title and posts an alarmist youtube video, though one would think that he should be able to read the actual paper, then it raises questions to his objectivity. Otherwise, why would he say things about his believed consequences of the SMOC breakdown, when such a breakdown has not been observed. Only changes from decreasing to increasing salinity levels have been observed. The rest is just speculation to feed global angsting.
As Eschenbach says:
I mean, other than the fact that neither “reversal” nor “SMOC” are even mentioned in the study?
This isn’t even the first time it’s happened. Check out the Abstract again. The study itself notes that the Maud Rise polynya—a big seasonal hole in the sea ice—was visible in the 1970s under similar conditions, and is currently visible again.
There is too little data to say much about the appearance of the Maud Rise polynya.
Basically, from reading this, I think that none of them have a clue what is happening:
Apart from the politically drive agenda, the lies and obfuscation, the fiddling with data, the biased computer bias (much like Grok), then there are also many unknown factors which for obvious reasons aren't factored in and sadly there isn't even the humbleness to allow for such unknown factors. This is not surprising if the aim is to pin it on humans with the aim to install even more draconian control measures.
I miss Pierre's input and how he would likely bring in the electrical component into it, the grounding of the sun by the companion star and so much more. That is perhaps where the real driver or a significant driver of the earth's climate systems, including the ocean currents, is hidden.
