Tag: Gulf Stream

Fears of Gulf Stream Collapse Fade as Hard Data Reveal Major Role of Natural Variation

The AMOC is a major system of ocean currents that transports warm water northward and cold water southward in the Atlantic, influencing Europe’s climate and global patterns. Concerns about weakening or collapse stem from climate models and freshwater influx from melting ice, which could reduce density and slow sinking in the North Atlantic.

From The Daily Sceptic

By Chris Morrison

In July 2023, Georgina Rannard of the BBC ran a ‘scientists say’ story stating that the Gulf Stream system of warm ocean currents “could collapse as early as 2025”. It would be difficult to find a more tosh-filled tale of climate bunkum so perfectly constructed to fill the population with alarm and a willingness to accept the collectivist Net Zero fantasy. All the recent evidence, other than the findings of rigged computer models, is providing conclusive proof that the Gulf Stream is currently stable, although subject to higher-than-expected natural variations in what are often very short time intervals.

For 20 years the RAPID-MOCHA-WBTS Array has measured the movements along the Atlantic Ocean at 26°N. A number of submerged stations have collected large amounts of data on the currents that bring warm waters from the Gulf up to the Arctic and return them cooled, heavier and saltier back to the south. Alarmists and Net Zero fantasists have long argued that humans interfere with this process. In unison they wail (perhaps next year!) that a ‘tipping point’ could be reached where the currents reverse and bring ice age weather to countries in the northern hemisphere.

But findings from computer models that have produced countless The Day After Tomorrow headlines are being rendered increasingly worthless by the actual RAPID data. In fact, there has been a largely unannounced pause in any weakening of the Gulf Stream – also known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) – since the early 2010s. Before that, and going right back to the start of measurements in 2004, the strength was generally relatively high, but there was a substantial weakening between 2009-2010. Such was the scale of this temporary weakening that the 20-year record has been skewed to show a 6% decadal decline. But RAPID has shown that sharp changes on a daily to inter-decadal period are the norm rather than exceptional. All of this is likely to be due to natural variation – what is often referred to as ‘noise’ – rather than any human cause.

Many of the fluctuations appear to be driven by changing air currents rather than deeper water formulations alone. These findings are starting to fundamentally change the way scientists understand the operation of the AMOC and mean that single or short-period snapshots are inadequate in measuring long-term strength. Needless to say, computer models are simply not up to the task of separating out any noise arising from the natural variability.

The scale of the natural variation can be truly astonishing. The RAPID observations from 2004-25 show a weakening of 1 Sv per decade in the AMOC. This is oceanographic-speak for a volume of water transported per second – 1 Sverdrup (Sv) equals one million cubic metres of water. The AMOC has an average strength of around 16-18 Sv, so the 20-year 6% average decadal decline is measurable but not necessarily significant given the enormous outlier recoded around 2010. In fact, RAPID has found that the AMOC can vary by several Sverdrups over months to years. The decline in 2009-2010 saw a 30% weakening which, since that time, has been restored. Some idea of the enormous changes discovered can be seen by comparing the 2009 Sv figure of 14.6 with the 18 Sv flowing in 2018. The one cause behind this huge change we can confidently rule out is humans using hydrocarbons.

The latest RAPID data show strong years in both 2023 and 2024, with flows around 17-18 Sv. Both these years have witnessed some of the highest flows recorded over the last two decades.

As with much climate science, a 20-year period of observation is a useful start but a clearer picture accounting for natural variation only emerges in a much longer time frame. The same principle applies to temperature measurement. In the world of climate Armageddon hype, the periods used to suggest long-term global warming seem to get smaller by the day. In the UK, it is by the day, hence the constant panic generation whenever the summer temperature rises above 30°C. This of course is why the scientific process has been largely trashed over climate. Debate is unwelcome, often penalised, since the matter is ‘settled’. Implausible proof is claimed from computer models running all manner of pseudoscientific attribution tales of bedwetting doom.

But away from clickbait Gulf Stream hysteria, some scientists are using RAPID’s growing volume of valuable data to increase understanding of the AMOC. In 2024, Dr Sang-Ki Lee, a Miami-based oceanographer working for NOAA, led a paper that observed a pause in any AMOC weakening since 2010, despite the growth of computer models projecting catastrophic anthropogenic decline. Despite these common modelled declines, Lee et al. notes that observations show “remarkable resilience” for the AMOC. Within any reasonable margin of error, it was found that the strength of the AMOC has been stable since around 2010. Looking forward, the authors suggest natural variation will keep the trend stable for several years to come.

There has been a pull back on the collapsing Gulf Stream scare of late. Computer model findings still broadcast plenty of human involvement, but genuine scares only have real legs when they are based on actual scientific observations and facts. The models assume that melting sea ice in the Arctic caused by humans burning hydrocarbons will freshen the water and interrupt the overturning flow to deeper waters. In a recent article published in Science, Susan Lozier, an oceanographer at Georgia Institute for Technology, observed: “That paradigm isn’t holding up.”

The Lee et al. paper refers to an underlying anthropogenic weakening produced by modelled suggestions. But RAPID provides actual proof that natural variation is far more important in determining how the Gulf Stream behaves. Another Net Zero scare bites the dust.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. Follow him on X.

20 Years After ‘An Inconvenient Truth’

Jan. 24 marked the 20th anniversary of the release of Al Gore’s alarmist global warming movie “An Inconvenient Truth.” Gore has surfed the movie and climate alarmism to a net worth estimated at $300 million and a Nobel Peace Prize.

A man in a black suit standing on ice in the Arctic, with the text 'The Arctic will be Ice Free 2013' displayed above.

From The Daily Caller

Logo of the Daily Caller News Foundation featuring bold text and colored accents.

Steve Milloy

Contributor

A speaker presenting on climate change at a podium, with images of glaciers, a sun, and volcanic activity displayed in the background.

Jan. 24 marked the 20th anniversary of the release of Al Gore’s alarmist global warming movie “An Inconvenient Truth.” Gore has surfed the movie and climate alarmism to a net worth estimated at $300 million and a Nobel Peace Prize.

But the rest of us have been saddled with: (1) a hoax that has debased the field of science; (2) an energy scam that has cost the world more than $10-20 trillion dollars and threatens our national security; and (3) a political power grab that has reduced our freedoms. 

(RELATED: Howard Lutnick Heckled By Al Gore At High-Profile Globalist Soirée)

Gore’s movie was junk from the get-go. I attended a meeting in early January 2006 where Gore presented the slide show that was the basis for the movie to a group of conservatives at a weekly meeting sponsored by Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform. After the presentation, I approached Gore and asked if he was interested in participating in some sort of debate about his claims. Although he said he was interested, his staff later declined.

The movie premiered weeks later at the Sundance Film Festival, and the rest is history. And here’s what that history is.

The “documentary” was initially a hit, grossing $50 million in theaters. Problematically, though, the film soon became part of many secondary school curriculums. Its credibility took a major hit in 2007 when a British court ruled that the movie could not be shown to school children with a warning label about its factual errors.

As I noted in a FOX news column at the time, the judge ruled that Gore’s claims about global warming drying up Lake Chad, causing polar bears to drown while being forced to swim farther for food; and shutting down the Gulf Stream were false and/or impossible. Based on the judge’s ruling, I estimated that “the footage that ought to be excised adds up to about 25 minutes or so out of the 98-minute film. What’s left is largely Gore personal drama and cinematic fluff that has nothing to do with the science of climate change.”

Despite the embarrassing ruling, Gore was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize that December. His acceptance speech doubled down on the movie claims and added a few more. None of his predictions came true.

His most well-known prediction was that the Arctic might be ice-free during the summer of 2014. But at its 2025 summer minimum, the Arctic still had more than 5 million square kilometers of sea ice — about the same as in 2007. His lesser known but equally erroneous predictions relate to global temperature, drought and glaciers, agriculture, wildfires, hurricanes, deforestation, and species extinction.

Al Gore inspired former-Marxist-turned-normal-person film director Martin Durkin to produce a counter to “An Inconvenient Truth” called “The Great Global Warming Swindle” that I also reviewed in a FOX News column. Though Gore dodged my debate challenge, I was able to make him “debate” by splicing together clips from Gore’s movie with opposing experts from Durkin’s film. Though now blocked for copyright claims, this “debate” can still be found on YouTube.

After all these years, the one thing Gore has been partially correct about is this: At the beginning of the United Nation’s COP-27 meeting in Egypt in 2022, Gore said “We have a credibility problem, all of us: We’re talking and we’re starting to act, but we’re not doing enough.” He’s correct about his credibility problem. It’s never gone away.

Steve Milloy is a biostatistician and lawyer. He posts on X at @JunkScience.com

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

A man in business attire gestures towards a projected slide displaying various images and text about climate change deniers, emphasizing the challenges in debating climate issues.

 Is The Gulf Stream Really Collapsing? Debunking Another Climate Doomsday Claim

The idea that global warming could paradoxically shut down the Gulf Stream, plunging Europe into a new cold spell—a scenario popularized by the film The Day After Tomorrow—is a powerful narrative.

A frozen landscape depicting large ice formations and a distant skyline of a city, with dramatic cloud patterns in the sky.

From No Trick Zone

By P Gosselin 

The idea that global warming could paradoxically shut down the Gulf Stream, plunging Europe into a new cold spell—a scenario popularized by the film The Day After Tomorrow—is a powerful narrative.

Map illustrating ocean currents, including warm surface flow in red and cool subsurface flow in blue, with continents labeled.

However, the latest episode of Klimaschau (Issue 237) challenges these alarmist predictions, scrutinizing the scientific evidence and the methods behind the claims. The segment focuses on skepticism regarding the imminent “tipping” of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC).

Recall how climatologists like Stefan Rahmstorf from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) argue that Arctic warming is weakening the AMOC due to an influx of freshwater, potentially causing Europe to become colder and drier.

Rahmstorf relied on cherry-picked data

For example, a 2021 study co-authored by Rahmstorf suggested the AMOC was at its weakest point in over a millennium. Rahmstorf has also been quoted predicting the AMOC could completely cease in 50 to 100 years. Yet, a sharp rebuttal by Kilburn and colleagues (2022) in the same journal. This counter-study accused Rahmstorf’s team of using “selective” or “cherry-picked” data to arrive at their conclusion.

The EIKE Klimaschau video presents criticism that challenges the reliability of the computer models often used by the PIK. Engineer and blogger Frank Bosse (Klimanachrichten) dismisses the PIK’s models as inherently unreliable and susceptible to manipulated data input. He points to the actual, unfiltered measurement data from the RAPID Project. This raw data shows the AMOC has been oscillating unspectacularly around a mean value between 2004 and 2024, with only one clear anomaly around 2010. This directly contradicts the models predicting a dramatic collapse.

Arctic Ice: Not Melting as Fast as Predicted

Further challenging the premises of the AMOC collapse theory (which relies on massive freshwater inflow from melting ice), the EIKE  video cites a 2025 study by England et al: The research, which reviewed apocalyptic melting scenarios, concluded that the decline in Arctic sea ice has “significantly slowed down” over the last two decades.

Crucially, there has been no statistically significant decline in September sea ice area since 2005.

Conclusion

The EIKE video concludes by linking the current alarmist methodology to the historical controversy of Michael E. Mann’s 1999 “Hockey Stick Study”. The implication is that the use of selective, non-representative data to generate dramatic claims is a recurring pattern in certain climate narratives.

Climate Tipping Points “May Already Have Arrived” Claims New Report – Just in Time for COP30

Also last week, the Guardian commented on the Green Blob-funded ‘Global Tipping Points Report 2025’ and reported its contention that the planet’s first catastrophic climate tipping point had been reached with “coral reefs facing widespread dieback”. About time too, Guardianistas might have felt. In June 1999, the newspaper’s veteran eco loon George Monbiot wrote that “the imminent total destruction of the world’s coral reefs is not a scare story but a fact”.

An artistic representation of a large gathering at the COP30 conference, featuring numerous people in formal attire amidst a lush green landscape with mountains and blue skies.

From The Daily Sceptic

By Chris Morrison

A person standing outdoors wearing a navy sweater, with a natural landscape of green and purple vegetation under a partly cloudy sky.

Writing in the Spectator last week, the Daily Sceptic’s Esteemed Editor-in-Chief Lord Tobes noted that eco-activists were fond of plucking numbers out of the air and claiming that’s how long we have left to save the Earth. But, he added, “it looks like they are now facing a ‘tipping point’ of their own”. Also last week, the Guardian commented on the Green Blob-funded ‘Global Tipping Points Report 2025’ and reported its contention that the planet’s first catastrophic climate tipping point had been reached with “coral reefs facing widespread dieback”. About time too, Guardianistas might have felt. In June 1999, the newspaper’s veteran eco loon George Monbiot wrote that “the imminent total destruction of the world’s coral reefs is not a scare story but a fact”.

Toby went on to observe Sun Tzu’s maxim that you should never interrupt your enemy when he’s making a mistake, “but I’m beginning to feel sorry for the climate hysterics”. There is none more hysterical (G. Monbiot excepted) than the annual ‘Global Tipping Points Report’, which is primarily bank-rolled by the Bezos Earth Fund. Along with numerous other scare reports, it is timed to lift mass climate psychosis ahead of the annual COP conference. Humanity will soon be in a danger zone where “multiple climate tipping points pose catastrophic risks to billions of people”, it wails. Already warm water coral reefs are crossing their “thermal tipping points”, it is claimed.

Map illustrating global climate tipping points, including regions at risk such as the Amazon Rainforest, Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, and various ice sheets, with color-coded indicators for tipping likelihood based on temperature rise.

The work is headed by Professor Timothy Lenton from the University of Exeter and is said to draw on research from scientists across the world. In fact, the agitprop is mostly climate-catastrophising codswallop produced by wishful thinking activists consulting their modern-day crystal balls, otherwise known as climate computer models. In the case of the coral reefs, the scare is risible. Tropical coral has existed for millions of years in waters between 24°C-32°C. Small local increases in temperature can lead to a natural process called bleaching, but there is solid scientific evidence that recovery is rapid when temperatures stabilise. Despite significant bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef over the last two decades, coral cover is currently at its fourth highest level since serious observations began about 40 years ago.

The so-called “central estimate” of coral’s “thermal tipping point” is claimed to be 1.2°C of global warming and this threshold is now said to have been passed. There is nothing right about this claim given the wide range of current temperatures that coral grows in today. In fact, coral grows faster in warmer waters as evidenced by comparing growth near the equator and the southern Great Barrier Reef. Sceptics might also ask how such temperature tipping point precision is available given what is now known about the lamentable state of much Government-organised meteorological measurement activity.

Net Zero is dying in many parts of the world, but the politically motivated settled science crowd is desperate to keep the fantasy alive by holding up the pseudoscientific results of computer models as some kind of convincing evidence. However, the report is not just about what is incorrectly referred to as ‘the’ science. High politics is on show with the COP30 President Designate André Aranha Correa do Lago writing the foreword and claiming: “United, we can reverse the dangerous trend towards a sequence of systems collapse in domino effect”. There is something for m’learned friends as well with the report suggesting: “Tipping points science should be used to strengthen future litigation efforts related to human rights.” Similar ambitions are shared by single weather ‘attribution’ agitators using computer model findings to pump up the claims in climate lawfare cases.

The report observes that climate communications can be instrumental in generating political momentum, particularly when targeted to policy advocacy and “trusted messengers”. Few messenger are trusted more than the BBC and its fellow climate bedwetters at the Guardian. In July 2023, Georgina Rannard of the BBC reported that “scientists say” a weakened Gulf Stream, which is a major part of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), could collapse by 2025. Most people are aware of the film The Day After Tomorrow when such a collapse caused the onset of Arctic weather conditions across the northern hemisphere. The AMOC collapse remains the gold standard of climate fearmongering. Computer models are worked hard to produce the often-outlandish claims.

“We cannot exclude that an AMOC tipping point may already have been passed,” states the report. Many computer models are said to predict the AMOC declining to a weak state by 2050. The tipping brigade’s answer to imaginary global disaster is of course to shorten Net Zero timelines, “and the immediate investment in the developing and scaling of sustainable carbon removal technologies”.

Meanwhile back in the real world, where unlimited pots of money are not available for ridiculous schemes like carbon capture and where the product of agitprop-narrated computer models is taken with a large pinch of salt, there is good news on the Gulf Stream. A group of scientists recently found that the AMOC had shown no decline since at least the 1960s. In a paper published recently in Nature, the scientists noted that many of the AMOC observations arise from examining sea-surface temperature anomalies, but these records “are not long enough to differentiate between low-frequency variability and long-term trends”. In other words, much alarmists copy is little more than opinions based on short-term variability.

In the detailed body of the ‘tipping points’ report, a median AMOC temperature tipping point of 1.8°C is established based on the latest computer modelling incorporating reduced overturning strength. Another tempting story here for the BBC/Guardian perhaps. Admittedly it comes with “low confidence”, but “scientists say” their scenario indicates imminent collapse of the AMOC from 2025 onwards.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. Follow him on X.

New Study, Good News Greenland’s Ice Loss Likely Won’t Disrupt Atlantic Current

We hear it again and again: the melting ice in Greenland due to global warming will soon lead to a collapse of the Gulf Stream system, with the result that it would be difficult to restart. Then we would see great disasters like those depicted in Roland Emmerich’s dramatic climate movie “Day after Tomorrow”.

From NoTrickZone

By P Gosselin

“Will dissuade people from climate doomism,” researcher hopes.  Ice sheet runoff at the coast has much less impact on the AMOC than melting ice bergs out to sea do. 

We hear it again and again: the melting ice in Greenland due to global warming will soon lead to a collapse of the Gulf Stream system, with the result that it would be difficult to restart. Then we would see great disasters like those depicted in Roland Emmerich’s dramatic climate movie “Day after Tomorrow”.

Hat-tip: EIKE

The seawater salinity in the north is critical because the salt-rich tropical water cools and sinks due to the higher salt content. This acts as the pump that makes circulation possible in the first place. This serves to transport very large amounts of heat into the North Atlantic, keeping Europe on the mild side in the wintertime. Scenarios have been published recently that calculate a drastic cooling of the large area (especially Europe) around it if the Gulf Stream system got “switched off”.  But those scenarios are proving to be over-dramatic and alarmist.

Yuxin Zhou, a postdoctoral researcher in UC Santa Barbara’s Department of Earth Science, recently went back in history to study when the AMOC was severely weakened, from 68,000 to 16,000 years ago, when the Laurentide Ice Sheet existed, and thick ice covered northern North America and even New York City. Today that massive ice shelf of course no longer exists and thus there is no longer the potential of an ice melt and iceberg release of that scale.

Very different, less dramatic circumstances today

By analyzing sea sediment deposited by floating ice bergs out to sea in the North Atlantic, Zhou found that AMOC heat transferring oceanic current had been already moderately weakened back then before all the icebergs floated over the North Atlantic. Comparing the situation to today: “In contrast, the circulation is very vigorous right now, which suggests the melting of Greenland is not likely to plunge the North Atlantic into another deep freeze of the sort the alarmists fret about all the time.

Moreover, Technology Networks here adds (emphasis added):

Not all melting has the same effect on the Atlantic circulation. Freshwater released as icebergs has a much larger impact on the AMOC than runoff, which is released after melting on land. Icebergs can cool the surrounding seawater, causing it to freeze into sea ice. Ironically, this ice layer acts as a blanket, keeping the ocean surface warm and preventing it from plunging down to the depths and driving the Atlantic circulation. What’s more, icebergs travel much farther out to sea than runoff, delivering freshwater to the regions where this deepwater formation occurs.”

Today’s Greenland’s freshwater runoff won’t have the anywhere near same impact as the mass icebergs of the last age. Image: Yuxin Zhou et al.

Thus, should Greenland’s glaciers further recede inland, they would only melt on land and release freshwater at the coast rather than release icebergs far out to sea. This would mean a considerably smaller impact on the AMOC.

Stop the doomism

Zhou summarizes: ““We have a lot of anxiety about how fast climate change is happening and how dramatic the changes could be. But this is a piece of good climate news that hopefully will dissuade people from climate doomism, and give people hope, because we do need hope to fight the climate crisis.”

BBC Rides to the Rescue as Scientists Inconveniently Find the Gulf Stream Isn’t Getting Weaker

Last month a group of scientists published a paper in Nature stating that the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) had shown no decline in strength since the 1960s. Helped by publicity in the Daily Sceptic, the story went viral on social media, although it was largely ignored in narrative-driven mainstream publications. The collapse of the Gulf Stream, a key component of the AMOC, is an important ‘tipping point’ story used to induce mass climate psychosis and make it easier to impose the Net Zero fantasy on increasing resentful and questioning populations.

From The Daily Sceptic

By Chris Morrison

Last month a group of scientists published a paper in Nature stating that the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) had shown no decline in strength since the 1960s. Helped by publicity in the Daily Sceptic, the story went viral on social media, although it was largely ignored in narrative-driven mainstream publications. The collapse of the Gulf Stream, a key component of the AMOC, is an important ‘tipping point’ story used to induce mass climate psychosis and make it easier to impose the Net Zero fantasy on increasing resentful and questioning populations. Obviously, reinforcements to back up such an important weaponised scare needed to be rushed to the front and the BBC has risen to the challenge. The AMOC “appears to be getting weaker” state BBC activists Simon King and Mark Poynting. Their long article is a classic of its kind in trying to deflect scientific findings that blow holes in the ‘settled’ narrative.

In the Nature paper, three scientists working out of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution stated that they came to their conclusion showing the stability of the AMOC after examining heat transfers between the sea and the atmosphere. It was noted that the AMOC had not weakened from 1963 to 2017, “although substantial variability exists at all latitudes”. This variability is the basis for much of the Gulf Stream fear-mongering. The BBC notes that the presence of larger grains of sediment on the ocean floor suggests the existence of stronger currents, pointing to a “cold blob” in the Atlantic that appears to have cooled of late. Thin pickings, it might be thought, to run an article titled ‘Could the UK actually get colder with global warming?’ The Woods Hole scientists note that records “are not long enough to differentiate between low frequency variability and long-term trends”.

The Nature story is not the only recent scientific finding that suggests the Day After Tomorrow alarm about the AMOC is a tad overdone. In 2023, Georgina Rannard of the BBC reported that “scientists say” a weakening Gulf Stream could collapse as early as 2025. There was no later reporting, needless to say, of subsequent work from a group of scientists at the US weather service NOAA that discovered the huge flow of Gulf Stream tropical water through the Florida Straits had remained “remarkably stable” for over 40 years.

Of course the BBC, along with most of the legacy media, has form as long as your arm when it comes to producing deflective copy seemingly designed to head off inconvenient scientific findings. The Great Barrier Reef (GBR) is the largest and best observed collection of tropical coral in the world. Any sign of ill health is a boon for green propogandists who argue that warming measured in tenths of a degree centigrade will destroy an organism that has survived for millions of years in temperatures between 24-32°C. For the last three years, coral on the GBR has hit recent record levels with scarcely a mention in mainstream media. Days before last year’s record was announced, the places where journalism goes to die were full of stories from a paper that conveniently noted climate change posed an “existential threat” to the reef. “The science tells us that the GBR is in danger and we should be guided by the science,” Professor Helen McGregor from the University of Wollongong told Victoria Gill of BBC News. Professor McGregor’s statement was an opinion readily broadcast by the BBC, a courtesy that does not appear to have been extended to the fact that coral on the GBR was at its highest level since detailed observations began.

It beggars belief that the BBC and all its fellow alarmists can run this stuff with a straight face knowing that crucial scientific information is missing from their reports. Important findings from reputable sources emerge about the current stability of the Gulf Stream and the response is to blow more smoke around that raises wholly unnecessary fears.

The main concern is that the AMOC “could suddenly switch off”, state King and Poynting. To back up their statement and provide the inevitable political message they note the comment of Matthew England, Professor of Oceanography at the University of South Wales: “We’re playing a bit of a Russian roulette game. The more we stack up the atmosphere with greenhouse gases, the more we warm the system, the more chance we have of an AMOC slowdown and collapse.” Now look what you plebs have done with your steak chomping, gas-guzzling central heating and naff holidays in Benidorm, is an unpleasant subtext here.

Of course, keen and dedicated followers of climate alarmists will note a master craftsman at work. In 2023, aided by 35 million computer hours and using an improbable rise in temperature of up to 4°C in less than 80 years, Professor Matthews suggested that there was a dramatic slowdown in deep Antarctica ocean currents. Melting Antarctica ice could lead to a 40% slowdown in just 30 years. The fact that Antarctica has barely warmed in 70 years is ignored.

Who needs Hollywood sci-fi blockbusters when we have the BBC.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.

The “Collapsing Gulf Stream” Scare is Back—Again

Ah, the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) collapse—our old friend. Like a horror movie franchise that refuses to die, the idea that the Gulf Stream is about to shut down and plunge Europe into an icy apocalypse has returned. This time, the BBC is breathlessly warning that “the chance of it happening is growing”​. But before you start knitting survivalist-grade wool socks, let’s take a moment to review how many times we’ve heard this story before—and why it never seems to pan out.

From Watts Up With That?

By Charles Rotter

Ah, the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) collapse—our old friend. Like a horror movie franchise that refuses to die, the idea that the Gulf Stream is about to shut down and plunge Europe into an icy apocalypse has returned. This time, the BBC is breathlessly warning that “the chance of it happening is growing”​. But before you start knitting survivalist-grade wool socks, let’s take a moment to review how many times we’ve heard this story before—and why it never seems to pan out.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn938ze4yyeo

A Climate Catastrophe… Someday, Maybe, Possibly

According to the BBC, AMOC is supposedly “getting weaker,” but they immediately admit that direct measurements have only been taken since 2004—meaning we have barely two decades of actual data​. Now, call me old-fashioned, but when you’re talking about an ocean system that has been operating for millions of years, 20 years of data is like trying to predict a person’s entire life based on a single Tuesday morning.

And what’s their big evidence? Ocean floor sediments and a “cold blob” in the Atlantic. That’s right, they’re looking at dirt samples and a patch of water that isn’t warming like the rest of the ocean, and somehow, this is supposed to spell doom for civilization​.

This wouldn’t be so bad if they admitted the uncertainty. Instead, the article plays a game of “it’s probably not happening, but it totally could!” For instance, the IPCC says they have “medium confidence” that AMOC will not collapse this century. But some other scientists say, well, maybe it could! As one of them warns, we “maybe need to be worried”​.

What kind of science is this? It sounds more like a horoscope than a serious climate analysis.

Fear-Mongering 101: Every Climate Scare is the Last One

Here’s where it gets really interesting. The article includes dire warnings that “even the most likely scenario” could lead to disastrous storms and colder European winters​. But haven’t we been told for decades that global warming was supposed to make winters warmer? How many times have we heard that skiing in the Alps would be a thing of the past? Now, suddenly, the UK is going to be plunged into Arctic conditions.

It’s the ultimate climate fear two-for-one special: No matter what happens—hotter, colder, wetter, drier—it’s all climate change, and it’s all your fault.

Of course, this isn’t the first time we’ve heard these predictions. The same scare popped up in The Day After Tomorrow (2004), based on theories that had been bouncing around for decades before that. In 2015, similar claims made headlines, only for scientists later to admit that “the jury is still out” on whether AMOC is actually slowing down​.

Then, just last month, a new study showed that—wait for it—the North Atlantic Current is actually stable​. So, despite all the apocalyptic speculation, the real-world evidence just isn’t there.

The Real Agenda: Cut Emissions, No Matter the Cost

At the end of the article, we get to the real point. The only way to “reduce these risks,” scientists insist, is to cut greenhouse gas emissions​. That’s right—whether the planet is warming or cooling, whether AMOC is speeding up or slowing down, the answer is always the same: more regulations, more taxes, more restrictions on energy use.

It’s almost as if the climate narrative isn’t really about science at all, but about controlling human activity.

Conclusion: No, the UK Won’t Freeze Over Anytime Soon

If history is any guide, this latest AMOC scare will soon fade away, just like all the previous ones. Then, in a few years, another set of scientists will “discover” the same threat all over again, and the cycle will repeat.

So, before you panic-buy thermal underwear and start hoarding firewood, remember: Climate doom predictions are like bad fashion trends—they always come back, but they never quite deliver on their promises.

HT/Darren K

Gulf Stream Collapsing Again!

Yes, it’s that old bogeyman again!
Its “The Day After Tomorrow” all over again!

Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC)

By Paul Homewood

Yes, it’s that old bogeyman again!

From the Mail:

The network of ocean currents which keep the Earth’s climate stable could be about to collapse, scientists have warned.

In an open letter, 44 of the world’s leading climate scientists say that key Atlantic Ocean currents – including the Gulf Stream – are on the brink of failure.

The scientists caution that the collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) could lead to ‘devastating and irreversible impacts’ which will affect ‘the entire world for centuries to come’.

The resulting climate fallout could plunge the UK into a ‘new Ice Age’, with winter temperatures plummetting up to 15°C (27°F) below the current average.

While the collapse of the Gulf Stream would be disastrous for Britain, that vital current is just one small part of AMOC’s massive global system.

This giant ocean conveyor belt is critical for moving heat around the planet, but research suggests that it has been slowing down and could soon reach a tipping point.

Without urgent action, the scientists warn that AMOC could fail completely within the next few decades.

As warm water travels northwards from the tropics, it hits the sea ice around Greenland and the Nordic countries, cooling and becoming much saltier.

As the water cools it becomes denser, sinking rapidly towards the bottom of the ocean where it flows back southwards before once again warming and rising to the surface.

This process of ‘deep water formation’ is the engine for a vast global conveyor belt which pumps heat and water all around the Atlantic Ocean.

However, studies suggest that AMOC’s deep water engine has started to slow and is now showing worrying signs of breaking down altogether.

As global temperatures rise, melting ice pours fresh water back into oceans, diluting the denser salty water and preventing it from sinking.

If this process were to break down entirely, it would have catastrophic knock-on effects including the weakening of the Gulf Stream and the disruption of global weather patterns.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13991003/Gulf-Stream-COLLAPSE-soon-scientists.html#newcomment

Its “The Day After Tomorrow” all over again!

As with a lot of climate scams, this one is based on just a few years data, from which the “scientists” conclude that they have identified cataclysmic changes that have not happened for millennia.

The Met Office give a more balanced summary:

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/learn-about/weather/oceans/amoc

Not this particular sentence:

Oceanographers have been measuring the AMOC continuously since 2004. The measurements have shown that the AMOC varies from year to year, and it is likely that these variations have an impact on the weather in the UK. However it is too early to say for sure whether there are any long term trends. Before 2004 the AMOC was only measured a few times,

So we only have data since 2004, and the year to year variations are large. To pretend that such a short series is in any way significant is not only unscientific but fraudulent.

This is what the series shows:

https://climexp.knmi.nl/getindices.cgi?WMO=NOCData/moc_mar_hc10_mon&STATION=AMOC_26N&TYPE=i&id=someone@somewhere&NPERYEAR=366

It would appear that there is little trend since around 2008.

The idea that the AMOC never changed before 2004 is absurd anyway.

Bob Dickson & Svein Østerhus laid out in their study, “One hundred years in the Norwegian Sea”, the major climatic changes in the Norwegian Sea and the rest of the Arctic:

All were associated with changes in Atlantic currents and the AMOC. The Warming in the North, for instance, occurred because of the influx of warm Atlantic seawater, in exactly the same way as with recent Arctic warming. As the Met Office explain, warm water evaporates leaving saltier water, which sinks because it is more dense. Saltier water of course freezes at lower temperatures, so Arctic sea ice tends to contract. (Note when it freezes, the salt tends to leech out, so either way the sea becomes saltier).

The Great Salinity Anomaly which followed the Warming was the result of that influx of warmer water retreating, in part because of northerly airflow :

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00291950701409256

These weather patterns are part and parcel of the Arctic Oscillation, another perfectly natural cycle. The anomalously higher pressure over Greenland marks the time of the negative AO:

From NSIDC:

https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/icelights/2012/02/arctic-oscillation-winter-storms-and-sea-ice

As fresh, polar water replaced warmer Atlantic water, salinity levels fell – hence the name given to the event. Just as Arctic sea ice had retreated during the Warming, it expanded rapidly during this period. The GSA was not just a phenomenon in the Norwegian Sea, because the polar gyre carried this fresh water around the whole of the Arctic Ocean.

Another factor identified by Dickson and Osterhus in the freshening of the Arctic Ocean is increasing discharge from Eurasian rivers into the basin. A warming climate means a wetter climate in those regions. And more river discharge leads to more sea ice and a colder Arctic.

In other words, these processes tend to be self correcting. Milder weather leads eventually to more sea ice and a colder climate, until eventually the AO flips back to positive again.

I’ll leave the final comment to Dickson & Osterhus:

All these changes were the result of natural processes. There is no evidence that these will change in future.

Shock Gulf Stream News: Top U.S. Scientists Find Flow Not Collapsing But “Remarkably Stable” Over Last 40 Years

Last year, Georgina Rannard of the BBC reported that “scientists say” a weakening Gulf Stream could collapse as early as this year, a dire process that would bring catastrophic changes in the weather in the northern hemisphere. Routine fear mongering, of course, from the Net Zero promoting BBC and this ‘tipping point’ scare is common among alarmists. After all, everyone knows about the 2004 dystopian Hollywood blockbuster The Day After Tomorrow. ‘Most of us are going to die’ is a great scoop, it is just a shame about the facts. Ground-breaking new work from scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has discovered that the huge flow of tropical water through the Florida Straits has remained “remarkably stable” for over 40 years.

From The Daily Sceptic

By Chris Morrison

Last year, Georgina Rannard of the BBC reported that “scientists say” a weakening Gulf Stream could collapse as early as this year, a dire process that would bring catastrophic changes in the weather in the northern hemisphere. Routine fear mongering, of course, from the Net Zero promoting BBC and this ‘tipping point’ scare is common among alarmists. After all, everyone knows about the 2004 dystopian Hollywood blockbuster The Day After Tomorrow. ‘Most of us are going to die’ is a great scoop, it is just a shame about the facts. Ground-breaking new work from scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has discovered that the huge flow of tropical water through the Florida Straits has remained “remarkably stable” for over 40 years.

The Florida current is a key component of the Gulf Stream, which is an important part of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). This current flows north, raising temperatures in the higher latitudes by up to 10°C. Warm tropical water flows between the Florida Peninsula, Cuba and the Bahamas at speeds up to seven kilometres per hour and provides most of the heat taken north by the AMOC. The paper notes that several recent studies have used a possible flow decline to speculate about a collapse in the Gulf Stream and the AMOC. Thus, clickbait science papers using computer models have been picked up by mainstream media and politicians to provoke fear of a Gulf Stream catastrophe.

Using data derived from motion-induced change in submarine cable voltages, and adjusting for errors caused by past geomagnetic data processing, the NOAA scientists state that their new 40-year record “challenges” the previously made assertions on the statistically significant decline of the Florida current. The respected climate scientist Judith Curry has hailed the new paper from the U.S. weather service as “important” and notes that the AMOC is not weakening despite it being touted as a climate tipping point.

It is unlikely that mainstream media will touch this paper since it kicks much of their fear mongering on the Gulf Stream into touch. Last year’s excitement suggesting imminent collapse was caused by a paper written by Peter Ditlevsen from the University of Copenhagen, who told the constantly worried Guardian that “we should be very worried”. The alarmists’ alarmist Professor Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact and Research said the Ditlevsen paper added to the “evidence” that the AMOC collapse “is much nearer than we thought”. We can’t rule out crossing the tipping point in the next decade or two, he added.

The NOAA scientists note that most climate models suggest a 34-45% decline in the present strength of the AMOC within less than 80 years. A number of ‘proxy’ records are said to indicate that the AMOC may already be slowing down on a centennial scale. There has been criticism of the Ditlevsen findings, with a subsequent paper observing that the uncertainties, mostly around sea surface temperature data, were too large to predict a tipping point for the AMOC. Such is the unreliability of climate computer models that the tipping point could occur anywhere between now and infinity. It all depends, it would seem, what is loaded into the model in the first place. But whatever is loaded, there appears to be a near guarantee that unquestioning activists in mainstream media will report any fear-packed message to a wider public.

Referring to the recent controversy, the NOAA scientists state that the ability of temperature based indices to represent the AMOC has been questioned. The recent reductions of sea surface temperatures in the subpolar North Atlantic is often assumed to be an indication of an AMOC slowdown. But the scientists suggest it could “largely be driven by the atmosphere alone without any changes in ocean circulation”. Further up the Gulf Stream, between New Jersey and Bermuda, the NOAAS authors go on to note that direct measurements from 1992 do not support suggestions that the AMOC has started to substantially slow down. Hydrographic data are said to be sparse, but “no significant weakening of the AMOC has been detected”.

The variations of the AMOC are being hotly disputed in scientific circles. Much of the research into this important ocean circulation is recent and a great deal needs to be learnt. The NOAA authors point out that investigating the variability of the Florida current “is of particular importance for detecting and better understanding changes in the Earth’s climate system, as well as for interpreting regional variations in weather, sea level and eco-systems”.

But all too often we see how ‘settled’ science – a harmful unwillingness to consider all climate variation other than those assumed to be caused by humans – debases much of the effort. ‘Blacklists’ of climate sceptics are compiled, academics lose their careers and fines and imprisonment are demanded for those who fail to toe the authorised line. Mainstream media only seem interested in silly sci-fi predictions of the imminent demise of the Gulf Stream. It grabs the headlines, is easy work if you can get it and plays out to an agreed political narrative. Like the multi-year record growth of coral at the Great Barrier Reef, the cyclical Arctic sea ice, the obvious corruptions in many temperature measurements and the astonishing CO2 ‘greening’ of the planet, the lies are all told by omitting obvious, easily obtainable and important facts.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.

Sea Surface Temperatures: West Versus East Coast.

Perhaps, this blog spends too much time talking about the atmosphere, so to make amends today, let’s see what is happening to the temperature of the ocean surface. And see whether anything unusual is going on.

From The Cliff Mass Weather Blog

By Cliff Mass

Perhaps, this blog spends too much time talking about the atmosphere, so to make amends today, let’s see what is happening to the temperature of the ocean surface.  And see whether anything unusual is going on. Let’s start with yesterday’s sea surface temperatures around North America (below).  Sorry, it is all in °C.   Keep in mind that 10°C is roughly 50F,  20°C is around 68F, and 30°C is approximately 86F.

The eastern Pacific near the West Coast is cold (about 50F), with central California’s waters a bit cooler than ours. You must head to the southern tip of the Baja Peninsula to find the water warm enough for comfortable swimming.

The East Coast is a study in contrasts.  The water off of New England is crazy cold (dropping below 7C), while the uber-warm Gulf Stream is found along the west coast of Florida, moves past the Carolinas, and then heads northeastward into the Atlantic.    

There is a HUGE temperate contrast between the Gulf Stream current and the cold water of the Northeast.    A blow-up of the sea surface temperatures off the Northwest really shows the amazing horizontal temperature changes north of the Gulf Stream

Look closely and you will waves in the interface between warm and cold water in the Atlantic and a fascinating loop in the warm water over the Gulf of Mexico (first image above).    Very warm water over the Caribbean and west of Central America

Your next question is probably:  is the current pattern of sea surface temperature unusual?  

To evaluate this, the next map shows the difference between yesterday’s sea surface temperature and normal conditions (also called the SST anomaly).

Pretty close to normal off the Northwest coast.  A few degrees colder than normal for California’s coastal waters. And near normal on Mexico’s west coast.   Most of the Gulf and Atlantic coast is slightly above normal. Temperature is cooler than normal north of the Gulf Stream, which suggests that the Gulf Stream is south of its normal position by a hundred miles or so.

The biggest sea surface temperature story is what is happening in the tropical Pacific.  Last year, a strong El Nino brought MUCH warmer than normal sea surface temperatures from South America, westward into the central Pacific.  

But something major has happened.  The tropical Pacific surface waters are rapidly cooling, resulting in cooler than normal waters in many locations (see map, with arrows showing you some of the coolest spots).

El Nino is dead.  Long live La Nina, its frigid cousin!