oceanthrowaway

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by oceanthrowaway 3y ago

   I’m maybe overly cautious about my online footprint. I understand your skepticism and think it’s well placed. For what it’s worth I don’t see my comment as FUD and would wager that the authors of the study would agree with my comment. I enj
2. 2.▲
   by oceanthrowaway 3y ago

   Thank you for your kind tone (genuinely). I understand your concern. I certainly hope it does not become a debate about scientific trust for hours although you are right its headed that way. I have a great amount of trust in the scientific
3. 3.▲
   by oceanthrowaway 3y ago

   I think if you read the full IPCC report you will see they are far from dramatic. Often news articles on the reports include calls to action (which I am all for given the path we are on). I believe the IPCC may also issue a statement about
4. 4.▲
   by oceanthrowaway 3y ago

   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.
5. 5.▲
   by oceanthrowaway 3y ago

   You are completely correct I regret that word choice now. I was rushing to comment because I felt it was important to provide context on AMOC collapse scholarship.
6. 6.▲
   by oceanthrowaway 3y ago

   No I am just noting that the AMOC bistability literature is decades long.
7. 7.▲
   by oceanthrowaway 3y ago

   I’m a physical oceanographer. While I have only skimmed this article I would like to make two quick comments. 1) The AMOC is one of the most studied parts of the world ocean and predictions about its collapse have been made since Stommel in