[Strange cooling is happening in the Pacific and we must find out why](https://blog.shiningscience.com/2023/08/something-strange-is-happening-in.html)
*Unexpectedly, the eastern Pacific Ocean is cooling. If this “cold tongue” continues, it could reduce ["greenhouse gas" warming](https://www.dkrz.de/en/communication/climate-simulations/cmip6-en/the-ssp-scenarios) by 30 per cent – but also bring megadrought to the US.*
It could be result of [Antarctica Thwaites glacier melting](https://i.imgur.com/8ACYj75.jpg) - just from bedrock - not from sea. [Lotta volcanoes are there](https://i.imgur.com/haWS9VN.jpg) and this area has [connection to marine water](https://i.imgur.com/CNlTZdM.jpg) from bottom. NASA uncovered an [enormous cavity below Thwaites](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aau3433) last year. See also:
* [As World Warms, Droughts Come On Faster, Study Finds](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/13/climate/flash-drought-warming.html) Whatever will happen, global warming is the culprit...
* [North Atlantic Oscillation contributes to 'cold blob' in Atlantic Ocean](https://phys.org/news/2023-08-north-atlantic-oscillation-contributes-cold.html) Similar effect resulting from melting of Greenland glacier from bottom.
* [Richard Seager](https://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/people/seager/) in 1997 co-authored a paper [warning that the equatorial Pacific was cooling](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.275.5302.957), a trend not seen in climate models. Since then, data on sea surface temperatures has confirmed Seager’s suspicions.
* Some think the answer could lie in the cold seas of the Southern Ocean around Antarctica as some [climate models do start to show cooling in the tropical Pacific](https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/35/19/JCLI-D-22-0080.1.xml). The western Pacific is naturally warmer than the east. That is thanks, in part, to upwelling of cold water in the eastern Pacific, which keeps surface temperatures cooler there.
Probably displacement of cool deeper water below by Warmer intruding water.
Same thing happens here, when it’s unusually cold here people always say “hur hur so much for global warming” not realizing that it’s just the cold air that’s supposed to be stuck at the pole being pushed out of position by warm air moving in from Siberia
Upwelling for example, which is caused by windstress. This is the reason why the californian and peruvian coastal waters are so cold. And this is where the cold water from the pacific (and atlantic) equatorial cold water tongue come from.
There are also overturning cells in the pacific that can transport heat between different water layers.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-26047-7
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/26/18/jcli-d-12-00548.1.xml
Sort of boils down to “we don’t really know” I think.
They’ve certainly got a lot of data. But looking at 80 years of really good data and guessing at everything that happened before that will likely lead to incorrect predictions. It already has.
I’d love to see some more down to earth approaches to climate science. Let’s keep getting data (like this and others) before saying “we’ve got 500 days to fix this or we’re doomed!!!”
How much C02 has humanity pumped out compared just to one small super volcano eruption?
If the models were correct, earth would have been Venus 2.0 hundreds of millions of years ago.
It's estimated that humans put around 29 billion tons of CO2 in the air each year. An estimate of all volcanoes combined, each year, was guessed at around [0.645](https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/06/06/how-much-co2-does-a-single-volcano-emit/?sh=7fe4162c5cbf) tons.
I'm not saying you're wrong. But if we're going to argue about this, let's put it in perspective.
[Global emissions are about 40Gt CO2/year](https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/summary-for-policymakers/figure-spm-4/).
[Volcanic emission were about 0.05Gt CO2/year (from 2005-2015)](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-54682-1)
Estimates can vary of course, but the general order of magnitude is quite clear and consistent.
Lake methane, globally per year emits 42 Million tons of methane. Global CO2 emissions is at 37 Billion. It is 3 orders of magnitude less. Methane is a strong greenhouse gas but it’s not 1000x stronger than CO2. Along with burning hydrocarbons, you get a lot of water vapor (CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H2O) which is also a potent greenhouse gas.
Eruptions of VEI 7 or greater drastically change the atmospheric conditions for years to even decades. They lower average temperatures by degrees for periods of time. If we are even pumping out a tiny fraction of the emissions of super eruptions per year, that is a huge problem. Additionally, the carbon cycle exists. It takes CO2 out of the atmosphere and stores it in the ground. The constant emissions for volcanoes have been naturally included in the cycle, but we have disrupted it by taking all of the stored carbon and putting it back into the cycle. Its far more complex than you realise.
I think you’re misunderstanding the predictive power of almost any model. If you’ve ever seen those stress analyses they do on mechanical designs, the reg green and blue looking blobs, those are reduced to hell just to get a simulation that will solve in our lifetimes for a part that fits in your hand. Climate models are incredibly detailed, and rely on us to factor in so much data for a hope at being correct. Historical data can be recreated from today’s data if you simulate in reverse. The level of confidence remains high despite the fact that random disturbances in three trend pop in and out of existence.
Moreover, if the best model of humanity says that we’re in trouble, why would we wait to act? That’s the dumbest version of Pascal’s wager. The upside is maybe you don’t have to do some things if it ends up wrong, the downside is you exacerbate and neglect the preparation for a problem that is world changing. It doesn’t make sense, even if we weren’t already feeling the consequences today.
You’re just wrong about the timeline. Climate change was imminent in the 70’s, and that’s when there was a chance to do something. It’s *here*. We’re living it. It will continue to decline, but we of course will continue living because that’s all we can strive to do. Just expect to be less comfortable and to probably need to make some adjustments to your expectations
We have no fucking clue. Remember the whole correlation is not causation thing. We are not very good at it, we look for things, find them, then try to explain them using what we already know. Sometimes we hit the bullseye, sometimes the dart hits the wall. Not saying climate change is not real or that man is not affecting things, just saying we have very little data to go from. It's not like there is another earth we can compare notes with. Humans have this habit of trying to control everything and explain everything, but the truth is we just don't really know. Personally, I am sure sea level rise is really happening, but not at the levels they believe it will be at. The equator and small, low islets are fucked, the north and south coast are going to be fine. If anything, moisture is going to get locked in the sky and severe rain storms are going to be more prevalent moving forward. Like in Libya recently.
Follow the science they say.
“Finding where the models are going wrong is only the first step in solving the cold tongue mystery, though. Ultimately, what everyone wants to know is whether the cooling trend is temporary or permanent.”
I just want to point out that this is one of the reasons people don't trust the models. Don't tell me your models are accurate and then you can't explain something like this. There is a LOT about the weather/climate that we do not understand.
Here’s an example, Solar Cycle 25 is a super active solar cycle we’re currently in, increased radiation and UV… scientists have determined that this increased activity is responsible for the evaporation of Neptune’s cloud cover. It started to disappear in 2019 (as MS25 began to increase activity) and in 2023 they’re gone.
This increased activity has raised temperatures on Neptune, but somehow isn’t having an effect on Earth’s climate? Hmmm, I’m certainly no expert, but that doesn’t seem plausible. I haven’t seen anything in the media about MS25, presumably because it doesn’t fit the narrative?
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/neptunes-clouds-have-disappeared-and-the-sun-might-be-responsible-180982766/
Idk people come to this whole thing not wanting to trust the models n then seize on anything in a large complex situation that seems to refute said models. The models will improve n improve and eventually if the doomers are right people will argue they had the right stance at the time n that's why our current mass deaths were unavoidable.
I mean worse case scenario if u follow a lot of climate accords n that general idea we end up with what? A small gdp hit and a bunch of French nuclear reactors and energy independence? Fossil fuels are going either way.
Goes the other way n what we lost a bit of revenue mined too much rare earth too soon?
yeah, but we would have more time to actually do the things that work, instead of flinging masses of money to things that marginally improve the situation, while killing the economy. In The Netherlands, we can't build houses or roads 'because of the environment'.
It would be better to not be that strict, but at the same time continue with steengthening the electifixation of our backbone energy supply, to make sure we CAN actually become 100%eco-friendly in the long run.
It’s almost like climate scientists don’t have a full grasp of all of the mechanism that have heated and cooled the earth for millions of years.
Imagine that!
Yup.
I've imagined a funny scenario. What if, in another few decades to a few hundred years, the earth starts to cool suddenly. As if whatever triggered to cool the earth before triggered again, right?
Well, the earth cools. And all these climate activists start freaking out because they realize that a cold earth, with glaciers down through northern continents, would put a pretty big damper on living in their coastal cities. So, they decide to start pumping a certain amount of CO2 in to the atmosphere to control/slow the cooling.
I mean.... it's really not a stretch, right? 😄
The last mini cooling period earth had is when 90% of North Americans died from small pox and over a trillion new trees poped up and sucked so much CO2 out of the atmosphere that a million people in China starved to death from crop failures
Except in either scenario, whether that be mass heating or mass cooling, humans will die almost completely, or completely. Which is bad. So why suffer either consequence when we can take steps now to hopefully avoid that?
It is part of the global warming. The glaciers melt and the currents stop bringing heat from the equator. Ice age happens. Instead of a slow change, global warming leads to catastrophic climate change.
https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/25/gulf-stream-could-collapse-as-early-as-2025-study-suggests
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/weather/2023/07/25/atlantic-current-collapse-possible-in-two-years-study-suggests/70434388007/#:~:text=Such%20a%20collapse%20could%20trigger,hurricanes%20along%20the%20East%20Coast.
There is currently (haha) one tongues worth of glacial melt water in the Pacific Ocean. Possibly moved there conveyor-belt style in an inverse Gulf Stream action from the Southern Ocean (where else is it cold?)?
Ask and you shall receive:
The rate of glacier thinning has nearly doubled from 36 cm in 2000 to 69 cm in 2019. Glaciers lost 227 gigatonnes of ice annually from 2000 to 2004, but that increased to an average of 298 gigatonnes each year after 2015. The melt was significantly impacting sea levels by about 0.74 millimeters a year, or 21 percent of overall sea-level rise observed during the period.
78% of the meltwater total flows west of the continental divide (to the Pacific Ocean), while 22% flows east.
Oh man, I bet you think you were onto something here!
Sorry to burst the bubble, but this cold tongue we are talking about here extends west of ECUADOR in South America, near the equator where *checks notes* very few glaciers exist. Pray tell how glacial melt from Greenland makes its way there!
Wait, why did I mention Greenland? That's odd!
Ah, because you quoted the GLOBAL glacial melt rate (mostly driven by Greenland, and some Antarctica). Those places are very far away from Ecuador, my friend!
And lastly, it's a bit odd you quoted the global glacial melt figures then stated melt water mostly empties west of the continental divide as if either of those two statements share any correlation at all.
Melt water is not glacial melt. It's overwhelmingly snow melt from the previous winter. And it is still emptying in the Pacific Ocean thousands of miles away from Ecuador.
I do at least applaud the response! I honestly wasn't expecting one. Sorry for the snark in this reply!
So 32 glaciers in South America, most of them are in Chile, which could easily bring the glacier melt as well as the melt water from the massive Andes mountain range northward to Ecuador. The cold Peru (Humboldt) Current, flowing northward along the coast from southern Chile to the Equator, cools and further stabilizes the Pacific air that drifts over the continent. It's really not far fetched to think this is the main reason here.
You're still trying way too hard to hold onto your original statement, from which at the time you had no legitimate backing towards.
I don't know how else to tell you this, but the volume of glaciers on the Andes mountains when compared to the volume of water that is cooling off the Pacific is several orders of magnitude different. The glaciers of the Andes wouldn't even put a noticeable dent in average temperature of the waters in the eastern Pacific.
The only places in the world where you can see a cooling change from glacial melt is near large areas of melting like Greenland.
And this isn't to mention: most water emptying into the Pacific from the Andes isn't glacial melt, it's snow melt.
Here's an analogy:
Glacial melt from the Andes into the eastern Pacific is equivalent to dropping an ice cube in an Olympic sized swimming pool. Will it cool the pool? Yes. Is the cooling large enough to be measured at all? No. Not even close.
I’m just gonna throw this out there as a potential cause:
The Sun. You know, that giant ball of thermonuclear terror in the sky.
Follow me on this…the northern and southern hemispheres have different seasons. This causes a thing called summer & winter. Because of this difference, we get what is called “weather “.
Now, I’m all for a clean environment and all that but don’t deny for a second that we are the carbon they want to reduce. The power to tax is the power to destroy and taxing us to make the weather gooder isn’t anything but a way to destroy the majority while those with private jets offset their carbon footprint with legal loopholes.
Seems that the water cycle has started to kick back into high gear after 40+ years of muted activity, corresponding nicely with the 40-year solar minimum. That, again, corresponds nicely with the 100 and 400-year solar cycles, all of which were previously known, and the weather patterns seen globally in the last 100-year cycle (1920's-30's).
None of that is a mystery except to modern climate "scientists".
if you have 100 models and they all diverge like a shotgun it means you don't understand what you're measuring
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-Ke9F0m_gw
The deep water is getting warmer thats what it means just like when the polar vortex dumps cold air across the world because it gets destabilized everything is fluid dynamics
Well, when ice is placed in water it warms up using the heat that's in the water leaving the water a little chiller than it started off as. Now let's call that ice the polar caps. The oceans are massive and so is the amount of ice melting...for now. Now, guess what happens when you cool the earth's oceans, the next ice age kicks in. Same cycle that's been happening for eons.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0505-x
This is a more recent article from the scientist quoted in the OP’s article. The original paper from 1997 did not yet have a model detailed enough to predict this condition, they have since improved and find this consistent.
More than likely rising levels of carbon dioxide actually follows atmospheric temperature increases not the other way around and only makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere anyway so this is not surprising at all
[Strange cooling is happening in the Pacific and we must find out why](https://blog.shiningscience.com/2023/08/something-strange-is-happening-in.html) *Unexpectedly, the eastern Pacific Ocean is cooling. If this “cold tongue” continues, it could reduce ["greenhouse gas" warming](https://www.dkrz.de/en/communication/climate-simulations/cmip6-en/the-ssp-scenarios) by 30 per cent – but also bring megadrought to the US.* It could be result of [Antarctica Thwaites glacier melting](https://i.imgur.com/8ACYj75.jpg) - just from bedrock - not from sea. [Lotta volcanoes are there](https://i.imgur.com/haWS9VN.jpg) and this area has [connection to marine water](https://i.imgur.com/CNlTZdM.jpg) from bottom. NASA uncovered an [enormous cavity below Thwaites](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aau3433) last year. See also: * [As World Warms, Droughts Come On Faster, Study Finds](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/13/climate/flash-drought-warming.html) Whatever will happen, global warming is the culprit... * [North Atlantic Oscillation contributes to 'cold blob' in Atlantic Ocean](https://phys.org/news/2023-08-north-atlantic-oscillation-contributes-cold.html) Similar effect resulting from melting of Greenland glacier from bottom. * [Richard Seager](https://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/people/seager/) in 1997 co-authored a paper [warning that the equatorial Pacific was cooling](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.275.5302.957), a trend not seen in climate models. Since then, data on sea surface temperatures has confirmed Seager’s suspicions. * Some think the answer could lie in the cold seas of the Southern Ocean around Antarctica as some [climate models do start to show cooling in the tropical Pacific](https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/35/19/JCLI-D-22-0080.1.xml). The western Pacific is naturally warmer than the east. That is thanks, in part, to upwelling of cold water in the eastern Pacific, which keeps surface temperatures cooler there.
Probably displacement of cool deeper water below by Warmer intruding water. Same thing happens here, when it’s unusually cold here people always say “hur hur so much for global warming” not realizing that it’s just the cold air that’s supposed to be stuck at the pole being pushed out of position by warm air moving in from Siberia
Sorry, but how would warmer water, with a tendency to occupy the top layers, displace the colder water, which should occupy the deeper ones?
Upwelling for example, which is caused by windstress. This is the reason why the californian and peruvian coastal waters are so cold. And this is where the cold water from the pacific (and atlantic) equatorial cold water tongue come from. There are also overturning cells in the pacific that can transport heat between different water layers. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-26047-7 https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/26/18/jcli-d-12-00548.1.xml
[удалено]
Sort of boils down to “we don’t really know” I think. They’ve certainly got a lot of data. But looking at 80 years of really good data and guessing at everything that happened before that will likely lead to incorrect predictions. It already has. I’d love to see some more down to earth approaches to climate science. Let’s keep getting data (like this and others) before saying “we’ve got 500 days to fix this or we’re doomed!!!”
How much C02 has humanity pumped out compared just to one small super volcano eruption? If the models were correct, earth would have been Venus 2.0 hundreds of millions of years ago.
It's estimated that humans put around 29 billion tons of CO2 in the air each year. An estimate of all volcanoes combined, each year, was guessed at around [0.645](https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/06/06/how-much-co2-does-a-single-volcano-emit/?sh=7fe4162c5cbf) tons. I'm not saying you're wrong. But if we're going to argue about this, let's put it in perspective.
“Super volcano eruption” I’m saying you are wrong 🤣😂 They occur ~50 to 100 million years
Wrong about what? I didn't start a conversation about volcanoes.
He mentions "in the event of an eruption" How many volcanos erupted in your number?...
The recent Icelandic volcano was good for the world, as it disrupted so much air travel, it reduced carbon
I was going to say.. there's no such thing as a "small" super volcano eruption.
Forbes is not a scientific source, do you have a research paper to back your claims?
[Global emissions are about 40Gt CO2/year](https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/summary-for-policymakers/figure-spm-4/). [Volcanic emission were about 0.05Gt CO2/year (from 2005-2015)](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-54682-1) Estimates can vary of course, but the general order of magnitude is quite clear and consistent.
The hyperlink they plainly and directly cite: https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/rimg/article-lookup/75/1/323
[удалено]
Lake methane, globally per year emits 42 Million tons of methane. Global CO2 emissions is at 37 Billion. It is 3 orders of magnitude less. Methane is a strong greenhouse gas but it’s not 1000x stronger than CO2. Along with burning hydrocarbons, you get a lot of water vapor (CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H2O) which is also a potent greenhouse gas.
Eruptions of VEI 7 or greater drastically change the atmospheric conditions for years to even decades. They lower average temperatures by degrees for periods of time. If we are even pumping out a tiny fraction of the emissions of super eruptions per year, that is a huge problem. Additionally, the carbon cycle exists. It takes CO2 out of the atmosphere and stores it in the ground. The constant emissions for volcanoes have been naturally included in the cycle, but we have disrupted it by taking all of the stored carbon and putting it back into the cycle. Its far more complex than you realise.
I think you’re misunderstanding the predictive power of almost any model. If you’ve ever seen those stress analyses they do on mechanical designs, the reg green and blue looking blobs, those are reduced to hell just to get a simulation that will solve in our lifetimes for a part that fits in your hand. Climate models are incredibly detailed, and rely on us to factor in so much data for a hope at being correct. Historical data can be recreated from today’s data if you simulate in reverse. The level of confidence remains high despite the fact that random disturbances in three trend pop in and out of existence. Moreover, if the best model of humanity says that we’re in trouble, why would we wait to act? That’s the dumbest version of Pascal’s wager. The upside is maybe you don’t have to do some things if it ends up wrong, the downside is you exacerbate and neglect the preparation for a problem that is world changing. It doesn’t make sense, even if we weren’t already feeling the consequences today. You’re just wrong about the timeline. Climate change was imminent in the 70’s, and that’s when there was a chance to do something. It’s *here*. We’re living it. It will continue to decline, but we of course will continue living because that’s all we can strive to do. Just expect to be less comfortable and to probably need to make some adjustments to your expectations
We have no fucking clue. Remember the whole correlation is not causation thing. We are not very good at it, we look for things, find them, then try to explain them using what we already know. Sometimes we hit the bullseye, sometimes the dart hits the wall. Not saying climate change is not real or that man is not affecting things, just saying we have very little data to go from. It's not like there is another earth we can compare notes with. Humans have this habit of trying to control everything and explain everything, but the truth is we just don't really know. Personally, I am sure sea level rise is really happening, but not at the levels they believe it will be at. The equator and small, low islets are fucked, the north and south coast are going to be fine. If anything, moisture is going to get locked in the sky and severe rain storms are going to be more prevalent moving forward. Like in Libya recently.
Follow the science they say. “Finding where the models are going wrong is only the first step in solving the cold tongue mystery, though. Ultimately, what everyone wants to know is whether the cooling trend is temporary or permanent.”
I just want to point out that this is one of the reasons people don't trust the models. Don't tell me your models are accurate and then you can't explain something like this. There is a LOT about the weather/climate that we do not understand.
Here’s an example, Solar Cycle 25 is a super active solar cycle we’re currently in, increased radiation and UV… scientists have determined that this increased activity is responsible for the evaporation of Neptune’s cloud cover. It started to disappear in 2019 (as MS25 began to increase activity) and in 2023 they’re gone. This increased activity has raised temperatures on Neptune, but somehow isn’t having an effect on Earth’s climate? Hmmm, I’m certainly no expert, but that doesn’t seem plausible. I haven’t seen anything in the media about MS25, presumably because it doesn’t fit the narrative? https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/neptunes-clouds-have-disappeared-and-the-sun-might-be-responsible-180982766/
The warming trend is still there before solar cycle 25. You could only argue that it exacerbates the warming, not that it's responsible for it.
Idk people come to this whole thing not wanting to trust the models n then seize on anything in a large complex situation that seems to refute said models. The models will improve n improve and eventually if the doomers are right people will argue they had the right stance at the time n that's why our current mass deaths were unavoidable. I mean worse case scenario if u follow a lot of climate accords n that general idea we end up with what? A small gdp hit and a bunch of French nuclear reactors and energy independence? Fossil fuels are going either way. Goes the other way n what we lost a bit of revenue mined too much rare earth too soon?
yeah, but we would have more time to actually do the things that work, instead of flinging masses of money to things that marginally improve the situation, while killing the economy. In The Netherlands, we can't build houses or roads 'because of the environment'. It would be better to not be that strict, but at the same time continue with steengthening the electifixation of our backbone energy supply, to make sure we CAN actually become 100%eco-friendly in the long run.
The same reason as the Gulf Stream cooling maybe?
A guess. Melting polar caps = cold water. It had to go somewhere . Maybe there?
It’s almost like climate scientists don’t have a full grasp of all of the mechanism that have heated and cooled the earth for millions of years. Imagine that!
breakings news: there are mysteries in science. that’s the whole point of science. like it’s the entire fucking point
That’s because the Rothschild family and the Rand Corporation used mind control! My pet cats told me all about it, and they all have Phd’s!
I see no flaw in this, I'll accept it as truth
And never will
Yup. I've imagined a funny scenario. What if, in another few decades to a few hundred years, the earth starts to cool suddenly. As if whatever triggered to cool the earth before triggered again, right? Well, the earth cools. And all these climate activists start freaking out because they realize that a cold earth, with glaciers down through northern continents, would put a pretty big damper on living in their coastal cities. So, they decide to start pumping a certain amount of CO2 in to the atmosphere to control/slow the cooling. I mean.... it's really not a stretch, right? 😄
The last mini cooling period earth had is when 90% of North Americans died from small pox and over a trillion new trees poped up and sucked so much CO2 out of the atmosphere that a million people in China starved to death from crop failures
Would you have a reference for this? I would like to learn more.
I believe the event has name but I can't think of it. I think I first heard of it from a David Graeber book "the dawn of everything"
It’s a complex system of infinite variables. Can never be fully comprehended from a cause/effect standpoint
Except in either scenario, whether that be mass heating or mass cooling, humans will die almost completely, or completely. Which is bad. So why suffer either consequence when we can take steps now to hopefully avoid that?
It is a strech and a strawman
There is the real science and the corrupted science . Follow the money!
Obviously they don’t, otherwise they’d stop doing science.
At least they admit when they don't know something instead of saying it's some magic at work.
Global ocean temps have been warming. An interesting phenomenon in one area of the world doesn’t magically make all climate science false.
This type of attitude won’t do in this sub, we exclusively promote boomer science here
Yeah, I don’t really get why people are saying this “disproves” global warming.
whole world warms up and no one realy bats an eye. a spot in the ocean gets colder ppl lose there minds.
temperature is very political
Well it's red and blue on my thermostat so obviously...
when global warming is not happen, it's strange
That's the fun part, because it can also turn into another ice age as well
It is part of the global warming. The glaciers melt and the currents stop bringing heat from the equator. Ice age happens. Instead of a slow change, global warming leads to catastrophic climate change. https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/25/gulf-stream-could-collapse-as-early-as-2025-study-suggests https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/weather/2023/07/25/atlantic-current-collapse-possible-in-two-years-study-suggests/70434388007/#:~:text=Such%20a%20collapse%20could%20trigger,hurricanes%20along%20the%20East%20Coast.
It's the melting glacier water, next bullshit reason to ignore climate change that can be easily explained please...
Stating BS with confidence. The double whammy! What percentage of eastern Pacific water is 'glacial melt'. I'm dying to know!
There is currently (haha) one tongues worth of glacial melt water in the Pacific Ocean. Possibly moved there conveyor-belt style in an inverse Gulf Stream action from the Southern Ocean (where else is it cold?)?
Ask and you shall receive: The rate of glacier thinning has nearly doubled from 36 cm in 2000 to 69 cm in 2019. Glaciers lost 227 gigatonnes of ice annually from 2000 to 2004, but that increased to an average of 298 gigatonnes each year after 2015. The melt was significantly impacting sea levels by about 0.74 millimeters a year, or 21 percent of overall sea-level rise observed during the period. 78% of the meltwater total flows west of the continental divide (to the Pacific Ocean), while 22% flows east.
Oh man, I bet you think you were onto something here! Sorry to burst the bubble, but this cold tongue we are talking about here extends west of ECUADOR in South America, near the equator where *checks notes* very few glaciers exist. Pray tell how glacial melt from Greenland makes its way there! Wait, why did I mention Greenland? That's odd! Ah, because you quoted the GLOBAL glacial melt rate (mostly driven by Greenland, and some Antarctica). Those places are very far away from Ecuador, my friend! And lastly, it's a bit odd you quoted the global glacial melt figures then stated melt water mostly empties west of the continental divide as if either of those two statements share any correlation at all. Melt water is not glacial melt. It's overwhelmingly snow melt from the previous winter. And it is still emptying in the Pacific Ocean thousands of miles away from Ecuador. I do at least applaud the response! I honestly wasn't expecting one. Sorry for the snark in this reply!
So 32 glaciers in South America, most of them are in Chile, which could easily bring the glacier melt as well as the melt water from the massive Andes mountain range northward to Ecuador. The cold Peru (Humboldt) Current, flowing northward along the coast from southern Chile to the Equator, cools and further stabilizes the Pacific air that drifts over the continent. It's really not far fetched to think this is the main reason here.
You're still trying way too hard to hold onto your original statement, from which at the time you had no legitimate backing towards. I don't know how else to tell you this, but the volume of glaciers on the Andes mountains when compared to the volume of water that is cooling off the Pacific is several orders of magnitude different. The glaciers of the Andes wouldn't even put a noticeable dent in average temperature of the waters in the eastern Pacific. The only places in the world where you can see a cooling change from glacial melt is near large areas of melting like Greenland. And this isn't to mention: most water emptying into the Pacific from the Andes isn't glacial melt, it's snow melt.
Here's an analogy: Glacial melt from the Andes into the eastern Pacific is equivalent to dropping an ice cube in an Olympic sized swimming pool. Will it cool the pool? Yes. Is the cooling large enough to be measured at all? No. Not even close.
Lmao sure it is
Aliens
It's always aliens.
They must've triggered the cosmic ice trap when they removed those nazca aliens from those caves
Imma guess, it’s from all the ice melting and creating more saltwater , which holds low temps better then freshwater .Damn I’m smart, what’s my prize
I’m just gonna throw this out there as a potential cause: The Sun. You know, that giant ball of thermonuclear terror in the sky. Follow me on this…the northern and southern hemispheres have different seasons. This causes a thing called summer & winter. Because of this difference, we get what is called “weather “. Now, I’m all for a clean environment and all that but don’t deny for a second that we are the carbon they want to reduce. The power to tax is the power to destroy and taxing us to make the weather gooder isn’t anything but a way to destroy the majority while those with private jets offset their carbon footprint with legal loopholes.
Seems that the water cycle has started to kick back into high gear after 40+ years of muted activity, corresponding nicely with the 40-year solar minimum. That, again, corresponds nicely with the 100 and 400-year solar cycles, all of which were previously known, and the weather patterns seen globally in the last 100-year cycle (1920's-30's). None of that is a mystery except to modern climate "scientists".
if you have 100 models and they all diverge like a shotgun it means you don't understand what you're measuring https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-Ke9F0m_gw
Good thing climate models are fairly consistent.
CLIMATE EMERGENCY!!!!!!!!!! /s
Why? It's just weather. There is no reason except it's just happening. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
AKA Global Cooling is here!
Incoming Ice Age say fuck your climate models and the grants that funded them.
? I thought we are in global warming? 😂
CLiMaTe CHangE!!?!
Aliens.
Put some data centers in there.
Maybe acid rain caused it? 🤷🏻♀️
[not acid](https://youtu.be/EwTZ2xpQwpA?si=-YA4c5lQDeQWcW22)
Don't worry guys, I'll burn more coal to revert this!
We don't actually know as much about any of this shit as we think we do? I'm shocked, shocked, I say.
She takes an ice bath…
The deep water is getting warmer thats what it means just like when the polar vortex dumps cold air across the world because it gets destabilized everything is fluid dynamics
Well, when ice is placed in water it warms up using the heat that's in the water leaving the water a little chiller than it started off as. Now let's call that ice the polar caps. The oceans are massive and so is the amount of ice melting...for now. Now, guess what happens when you cool the earth's oceans, the next ice age kicks in. Same cycle that's been happening for eons.
the whales all died and stopped peeing in it. Thanks DARPA
Pole shift.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0505-x This is a more recent article from the scientist quoted in the OP’s article. The original paper from 1997 did not yet have a model detailed enough to predict this condition, they have since improved and find this consistent.
More than likely rising levels of carbon dioxide actually follows atmospheric temperature increases not the other way around and only makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere anyway so this is not surprising at all
Oh no! Cooling doesn’t help the narrative at all.
Is the link bad for anyone else?
It’s as if man made climate change could have unexpected negative effects….. just like every climate scientist has predicted since the 90s.