Now on ScienceBlogs: Another contender for the worst reporting ever: "Coma man"

Seed Media Group

Collective Imagination

The Island of Doubt

An irregular exploration of the struggle between the power of rational discourse and the scientific method on one hand, and the forces of superstition and dogma on the other. Mostly regarding climate change, though.

Profile

me-fergus.jpg James Hrynyshyn is a freelance science journalist based in western North Carolina, where he tries to put degrees in marine biology and journalism to good use.

Search

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Other Doubtful Blogs

Inspiration

The Demon-Haunted World:
Science as a Candle
in the Dark, by Carl Sagan
(A review)

The Doubter's Companion:
by John Ralston Saul (Excerpts)

Skeptic Magazine: www.skeptic.com

Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal: www.csicop.org

A poem by Yehuda Amichai:
The Place
Where We Are Right


The Meaning of the
Island of Doubt


Author's site: cyamid.net


Add to Technorati Favorites! Penetrating so many secrets, we cease to believe in the unknowable. But there it sits nevertheless, calmly licking its chops.
--- H. L. Mencken

By doubting we come to inquiry; and through inquiry we perceive truth.
--- Peter Abelard

Undisguised clarity is easily mistaken for arrogance.
-- Richard Dawkins

As for evolution, it happened. Deal with it.
-- Michael Shermer.

"There is no need to sally forth, for it remains true that those things which make us human are, curiously enough, always close at hand. Resolve, then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving, and tiny blasts of tinny trumpets, we have met the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us."
--Walt Kelly

« The problem with Thanksgiving ... | Main | Stoat is wrong, Monbiot is right »

Oh you wacky Gulf Stream

Category: climate
Posted on: December 2, 2008 11:50 AM, by James Hrynyshyn

ResearchBlogging.orgTwenty years ago, a clever television documentary called "After the Warming" tried to paint a picture of climate change, and humankind's delayed attempts to deal with it, for next five decades. Drawing on the best science available at the time, the producers predicted that we'd never have enough information to know just how bad things were going to get until it was too late. A new study in Nature Geoscience reminds us just how complex the global climate picture really is.

"Surprising return of deep convection to the subpolar North Atlantic Ocean in winter 2007-2008" (subs req'd) by a team of American, French, Danish and Canadian researchers, reports that things are back to what's presumably normal in northern waters after a decade or so of reduced or even absent convection.

Similar findings are scheduled to appear soon in Geophysical Research Letters (doi:10.1029/2008GL036162) by a separate team based in Canada.

This is potentially good news because the deep convection, or overturning, of oceanic waters is a major player in the global oceanic heat flux and removes any awful lot of carbon from the surface. The Gulf Stream is the most popular element of the global deep ocean conveyor that is controlled in part by the convection. But if the overturning stops, it won't be just the Gulf Stream that will be affected. Global warming will almost certainly kick into high gear. Indeed, the reduced convection reports had suggested to some climatologists that climate change was already wreaking havoc.

Unfortunately, this is a story that raises more questions than it answers. For example, the return of the convection may be tied to the massive transfer of ice from the Arctic Ocean to the North Atlantic last summer — an event widely thought to be tied to global warming itself. So which way things will go in the future is a big mystery. As the authors of the new paper write:

The myriad of factors involving the atmosphere-ocean-ice system that led to the return of deep convection in the winter of 2007-2008 highlights the complexity of the convective system in the North Atlantic, making it difficult to predict when deep mixing is likely to occur.
And here's an excerpt from a news item in Nature by Quirin Schiermeier
Whether the convection is back to stay, however, is not known. "There is a lot of natural fluctuation at play," says Detlef Quadfasel, an oceanographer and climate scientist at the University of Hamburg in Germany. "One nice day of ocean weather doesn't really tell you a lot about what you might have to expect in the future."
So how much data do we need? Schiermeier gave a possible answer in a story published last summer:
We won't know until we have collected more than 20 years' worth of continuous measurements, researchers said on Monday at the general assembly of the European Geoscience Union in Vienna, Austria.
In "After the Warming," the fate of the Atlantic's deep convection remains unknown until 2050. By the time our future climatologists finally figured out that it was irrevocably slowing to a halt, it was far too late to do anything about it. But science tends to move faster that most prognosticators anticipate -- kind of like climate change. So let's hope the 20-year timeframe turns out to be closer to the truth.

Meaning we shouldn't be scrimping on the funding for more research on this particular subject.

--
Kjetil VÃ¥ge, Robert S. Pickart, Virginie Thierry, Gilles Reverdin, Craig M. Lee, Brian Petrie, Tom A. Agnew, Amy Wong, Mads H. Ribergaard (2008). Surprising return of deep convection to the subpolar North Atlantic Ocean in winter 2007-2008 Nature Geoscience DOI: 10.1038/ngeo382

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/86964

Comments

1

There you go with that "WE" thing again James. YOU!!!!! Get it right. skwak skwak - Skwawkie the parrot.

Posted by: Skwakie the Parrot | December 2, 2008 4:48 PM

2

HE did get it right. YOU got it wrong.

Posted by: paulm | December 2, 2008 11:50 PM

3

As a system engineer, I get nervous about this kind of news. Systems do not flip-flop if they are stable. When they start doing that, their state is close to the limit of their safe operating area.

That fluctuation might be normal, but as long as there are no good models that predict it, we must be worried.

Posted by: Lassi Hippeläinen | December 3, 2008 5:14 AM

4

As a taxpayer I get nervous about this kind of pseudoscience and hold on tighter to my wallet.

Posted by: Mark in MN | December 6, 2008 5:35 PM

5

Same old schtick. "We don't know anything about this, but we need to worry - a lot - about what could possibly happen to a system we know absolutely nothing about. So, everybody Panic." What a moronic way to go through life.

Posted by: PT Barnum | December 9, 2008 1:44 PM

6

swawk! skwawk! swawk! Let's parrot stupid liberal talking points about the doom and gloom of mankind!!! skwawk!!! p.s. after we are done parroting, remember to sign our name to it and act like it's original or important. SKWAWK!!!!!!!

Posted by: Swawkeroo the Skwakster | December 9, 2008 3:22 PM

7

Wow, you've got some weird trolls over here.

Good to hear the Gulf Stream is still moving, though.

Posted by: KristinMH | December 10, 2008 9:27 AM

8

It's pretty clear that these people think that all global warming is about is a rise in temperature. If that was all that was going to happen, a warmer Canada might be better

Posted by: sohbet odalari | January 12, 2009 1:33 PM

9

Best Regards from me.

Posted by: cartier | February 5, 2009 7:06 AM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Enter to win a free copy of The Monty Hall Problem
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement
Collective Imagination

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM