[xhkkffbf]

Why do climate people write headlines like this? Everyone gets cynical and dismissive when they endure predictions like those made by Al Gore or Greta Thunberg. Even if the predictions are directionally correct, people remember phrases like "locked in" and assume that the entire science was broken. If the current only partially collapses or changes in a material way, everyone will say, "See, it wasn't locked in."

[jmcqk6]

You can't keep people from being stupid via the language you use. People who have the reaction you describe would not magically "get it" if different language is used.

[jdlshore]

If it’s a headline, it’s coming from a press office, not researchers. The “why” is the same as for any other journalism: to get clicks.

[DyslexicAtheist]

> it’s coming from a press office, not researchers

fwiw, the pre-print reads:

   To define committed collapse, i.e. that past and unavoidable future emissions have already locked in collapse, we assume that global emissions cannot be mitigated from peak to net-zero any faster than 35 years.

...

    The ‘2025 peak ensemble’ therefore quantifies the probability that AMOC collapse is already committed, i.e. past emission have already locked in the collapse by 2025;