Trash Science Exposed: Journal Findings Refute Potsdam Institute’s Alarmist Gulf Stream Collapse Claims

Gulf Stream is doing fine: Potsdam Institute horror story suffers bitter setback

By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(German text translated/edited by P Gosselin)

The horror scenario from the movie The Day After Tomorrow keeps getting presented as a real plausible scenario for our future: Falling salt content of the upper Gulf Stream due to melting ice flowing into the Arctic is slowing down the North Atlantic Current (NAC), and so doom and gloom is about to sweep across the North Atlantic.

However a team of researchers led by Carina Bringedal from the University of Bergen recently studied the northern end of the North Atlantic ocean circulation (Bringedal & Eldevik 2018). The result: the inflow of warm water and the overflow of denser deep water are in good sync. And since 1998 we do not see any long-term divergence of the sort we would expect to observe when adding more fresh water that would slow the “pump” down.

On shorter timescales the currents are influenced by the winds and the NAO. On longer timescales the currents are influenced by the AMOC.

In short: There’s no sign of a “collapsing Gulf Stream” due to the anthropogenic warming of the Arctic and the associated melting of the ice:

Figure 1: Transported water volume in the North Atlantic during the past 25 years. Chart: Bringedal & Eldevik 2018

Observed rainfall contradicts doom & gloom claims

In the published paper that concerns the doom and gloom forecasts related to the weakening Gulf Stream (Caesar et al. 2018), there’s a second reason that gets named: anthropogenic impacts are causing more rainfall over the North Atlantic.

Yet, the following chart shows this as well is not being observed:

Figure 2: Chart depicting rainfall in the North Atlantic over the past 35 years. Source: KNMI Climate Explorer. Data: NOAA.

24 responses to “Trash Science Exposed: Journal Findings Refute Potsdam Institute’s Alarmist Gulf Stream Collapse Claims”

  1. Brian G Valentine

    “Potsdam Institute”

    Why does the State give money to a terrorist organization?

    1. SebastianH

      Wow …

      1. spike55

        Wow indeed,

        The fact that someone actually FUNDS what is ostensibly just a manic pack of scaremongering propagandists, is remarkable in itself.

        Their soulless aim is to promote the AGW scam through manic scare/terror tactics.

        ISIS does the same to push their agenda, as does basically every other terrorist CULT/organisation in the world.

        1. SebastianH

          ISIS does the same …

          Wow^2 …

          1. spike55

            Yep, wow is the right word. !!

            Glad you finally see the similarity.

            Well done.

            Maybe you are finally waking up to the depths of lies and deceit your AGW masters go to with their anti-science scare tactics.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FS5CH-Xc0co

            And you say they are NOT just like ISIS??

            WOW, just WOW. !!

    2. Bitter&twisted

      Potsdam Institute.
      Wasn’t that run by that raving lunatic and World Government fanatic, Shellhumper?

  2. spike55

    In short, there are NO signs of ANYTHING happening due to anthropogenic warming.

    Not even any evidence of anthropogenic warming.

    Only slight warming in the last 40 years has been from two El Ninos ocean releases, and the second of those looks like it has basically disappeared.

    Oceans have only warmed 0.08ºC in 60 or so years, despite the grand solar maximum of the latter half of last century.

    Anthropogenic warming is a total NON-EVENT !!

    1. SebastianH

      Nope.

      1. spike55

        NOPE, no sign of any anthrop[pyogenic global warming anywhere.

        Anthropogenic warming is a total NON-EVENT !!

        Glad to see you AGREE with every word I said.

        TOTALLY UNABLE to counter one thing.

        STILL totally INCAPABLE of providing even the slightest evidence.

        Q1. In what way has the climate changed in the last 40 years, that can be scientifically attributable to human CO2 ?

        Q2. Do you have ANY EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE at all that humans have changed the global climate in ANYWAY WHATSOEVER?

  3. bonbon

    Emmerich, the movie producer, was rightly annoyed at a preview of Al Gore’s movie – loudly protesting Gore had stolen his stryofoam glacier scenes. Looks like the PKI is at it again.
    Still, one wonders how much the movie industry works with gov’t?

  4. SebastianH

    So your favorite paid for by the fossil fuel industry authors use a (unfortunatelly) pay-walled paper to counter another one and of course it is their word that counts here? The abstract of the paper they bring up doesn’t say anything about the gulfstream’s stability. Hmm …

    And I can’t find any mention of an increased rainfall over the North Atlantic in that Caesar paper they are referring to: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324452795/download

    Can you?

    1. spike55

      Certainly one would take the word of basically anyone over the crap alarmista non-science that oozes out of Potsdam.

      Postdam are among the upper hierarchy of the AGW farce/scare. Its almost as if they are specifically PAID to come out with ABJECT nonsense to push the AGW scam. 😉

      1. SebastianH

        Certainly one would take the word of basically anyone over the crap alarmista non-science that oozes out of Potsdam.

        Yep, you are taking the word of anyone who confirms your strange belief over anything. Do you know what we call such a behaviour? 😉

        1. spike55

          “Do you know what we call such a behaviour? 😉”

          TRUTH. !

          You should try facing it some day, and stop your petty juvenile trolling.

    2. Anders Valland

      Paid for by the fossil fuel industry? Where do you get this from? The University of Bergen is Norways center of climate doom fixation, with no less than three government funded centers to support the message of climate doom.

      The paper coming out of the University is from the alarmist camp, my friend. That said, there are very good research groups at that University, and they do science for real. While the political spin coming out of the dlimate centers must be questioned, the real science coming form the University is presented in an open fashion. No fossil fuel funding there, unless you want to say that Norway in its entirety is funded by fossil fuels. In which case I say you don’t know anything about Norway. I should know. I live here. You don’t.

  5. John F. Hultquist

    Take a look at satellite images (thermal) of the Gulf Stream.
    It gathers itself in the tropics and the Gulf of Mexico. It pushes north from there because of easily understood forces, such as the long fetch length of the trade winds. (Follow Hurricane Florence’s recent path.)
    The North Atlantic (fresh water from ice and rainfall) has very little to do with it, and . . .
    . . . most of the energy has disappeared by the time the water gets to about 50° W. Longitude, the southeastern tip of the Grand Banks off Newfoundland.
    Seriously. Look at the thermal images.

    1. SebastianH

      The North Atlantic (fresh water from ice and rainfall) has very little to do with it, and . . .

      Do you understand how the gulf stream works? Has nothing to do with salinity?

      . . . most of the energy has disappeared by the time the water gets to about 50° W. Longitude, the southeastern tip of the Grand Banks off Newfoundland.
      Seriously. Look at the thermal images.

      So you see a thermal image of the gulf stream (like this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Stream#/media/File:Golfstrom.jpg) and conclude that the cold part at the top has nothing to do with it? Really?

      1. spike55

        Seb’s graph backs up everything John said.

        Seems seb is agreeing .. albeit accidentally

        Seems seb has zero clue what he is talking about.

        1. SebastianH

          Seb’s graph backs up everything John said.

          Seems seb is agreeing .. albeit accidentally

          Your reality is pretty strange … do you really perceive my reply this way or is this just another troll attempt?

  6. Brian G Valentine

    It is certainly possible to stop the North Gulf Stream, by stopping the Earth from rotating.

    I thought this concept was put to bed long ago?

    1. dennisambler

      It was, but Rahmstorf keeps recycling it, if he repeats it often enough, people start to believe it, especially when it is fed to them by the MSM as fact.

      Carl Wunsch in 2004:

      “Gulf Stream safe if wind blows and Earth turns”

      https://www.nature.com/articles/428601c
      “The only way to produce an ocean circulation without a Gulf Stream is either to turn off the wind system, or to stop the Earth’s rotation, or both.

      The occurrence of a climate state without the Gulf Stream any time soon — within tens of millions of years — has a probability of little more than zero.”

      Others agree:
      https://web.uri.edu/gso/rossby-gulf-stream-is-not-slowing/

  7. bonbon

    Potsdam Institute was the stable of Dr. John Schellnhuber CBE, who went on to write the Pope’s Laudato Si, a paean to Gaia. He got his CBE (Commander British Empire ) personally from the Queen at Berlin Embassy in 2004. His optimum population of 2 billion seemed to attract British honors. Decarbonization and the Great Transformation being icing on the cake.
    Looks like the PIK successor is now fawning for Royal honors?

  8. spike55

    OT: DMI sea ice volume has its second negative loss in a row.

    Looks like it on its way back up.

  9. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #328 | Watts Up With That?

Leave a Reply

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close