|
|
|
|
|
by kergonath
992 days ago
|
|
“Prove” has different meanings for most people compared to scientists. As you say, it is impossible to prove that something like this, which results from a complex set of conditions and most likely a complex set of causes, results from a single thing. So we speak in probabilities, confidence intervals, and significance. That’s just science speak. This results from human-made global warming in the same way as a smoker’s lung cancer results from smoking. The conclusion is also the same in both cases: “don’t do it”. Nobody can prove that it will kill, but it drastically increases the odds. Also, note that this is not at all unexpected. I remember articles in scientific vulgarisation magazines in the 1990s discussion this and the fact that, counter-intuitively, global warming could result in local cooling in Western Europe because of a weakened Gulf Stream. We are still far from that. |
|
This would be bad, but now has me wondering, what would happen to all that energy if it doesn't travel up towards the north pole to be cooled? Could we have an extra hot Central Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean?
Does anyone know of any studies which have looked into this?