Atlantic Current Halted In 2004

This is honestly quite disturbing to find. Apparently for about 10 days in November of 2004 the Atlantic current halted.

environment.guardian.co.uk...

Many of the predictions have stated it would be decades or a century before the current would halt. Based on some of the observations I have seen I would doubt that time frame. I think much of it was global warming hysteria to keep the machine alive by pushing back so many years the possibility of something changing.

Back on June 30th 2004 I started a thread on my site about the weakening current.

www.climatepatrol.com...

The gulf stream velocity image showed clearly a very weak current at the time. I find it interesting that Dec 21, 2004 that the agency providing this data changed how the results were displayed. No longer did the image show a relative image. No longer did it show the flow of water in relation to water around it. It was changed to show a current relative to land. This makes it impossible to determine whether a "current" actually exists. For the "current" in the new system to vanish it would have to require the entire ocean to stop moving instead of the Atlantic current alone stopping.

What are your thoughts on this?

I guess I can't edit my post. I wanted to point out this very interesting comment in the story.

Lloyd Keigwin, a scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, in Massachusetts, in the US, described the temporary shutdown as "the most abrupt change in the whole [climate] record".

That is a significant statement. I hope people reading this thread keep it in mind. The war for oil won't compare to the war for food.

Indy,

First off, thanks for bringing this to us.

Have you read anywhere exactly what the dates were of the shutdown? I'm very curious and would be most appreciative if you can find that info and share it with us.

Thanks again!

Val.. I haven't seen anything that covers the dates. Not sure we'll ever know. But it is amazing that this happened. Judging by the lack of responses to the thread I don't think people realize just how serious this is. This is potentially the biggest story in modern times. This could end up being the most expensive natural disaster in history by a long shot.

My mind is just clicking on whether it was around the time of the huge Indonesian quake. Could it all be connected?

You are right...this is amazingly huge news. And scary.

At best the problem with the current would have occurred a month before the big quake. Is it interesting to note that this happened during one of the worst hurricane seasons ever. Maybe this weak current helped play a part in the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons.

Originally posted by Indy
This is potentially the biggest story in modern times. This could end up being the most expensive natural disaster in history by a long shot.

Hi Indy,

You're absolutely right, I doubt highly if many have a cognizance on exactly how serious this could well be.

Around the beginning of 2005 or so, I know a study was released by the french who were studying the "chimneys" or water columns in the arctic. Where they had detailed 20 or more in prior years, they had only reported finding 4 in early 2005. For those reading who may not understand what that means, it means a serious slowing of the NAO (North Atlantic Oscillation or Gulfstream Conveyor), that returns cold dense saline water back southward while transporting warm fresher water northward. These "chimneys" are exactly those water columns or colder denser saline water falling to lower depths.

I will try and find the report on that and add it in as a link.

Also, Indy, im curious have you gone to the ThermoSalinity charts from the ARGO Data Buoy array site (at Coriolis, or any other Data Collection Public site) to try and determine the variance for yourself for say a given period of perhaps 3 months prior, during and 3 months after? I think that may well show from their archives whether or not there was a shutdown that was never publicized and we should be worried about.


Just my thoughts,


AB1

As an addendum (although Indy I said i would ad the link, this is another from Newscientist around November 2005 from researcher Harry Bryden at the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton, UK) In which he detailed that although certain facets of the current were operating normally, other areas were of greater concertain. See Excerps...

But when Bryden’s team measured north-south heat flow last year, using a set of instruments strung across the Atlantic from the Canary Islands to the Bahamas, they found that the division of the waters appeared to have changed since previous surveys in 1957, 1981 and 1992. From the amount of water in the subtropical gyre and the flow southwards at depth, they calculate that the quantity of warm water flowing north had fallen by around 30%.

Of more alarming consequence to any of those living in the UK should be this in particular:

But Bryden’s study has revealed that while one area of sinking water, on the Canadian side of Greenland, still seems to be functioning as normal, a second area on the European side has partially shut down and is sending only half as much deep water south as before. The two southward flows can be distinguished because they travel at different depths.

Source for Slowdown Study


These current slowdowns have conveniently been over-looked by many administration factions here in the US for various reasons i'm sure...none the less it is happening and yes, is VERY scary...hopefully others will have their interest piqued and take notice.


AB1

Thanks for bringing it up Indie. Been awhile since anyone talked about the Gulf stream. The Guardian seems to have their own interpretation of events???

I couldn't find anything in here about a 10 day halt in the gulf stream:
NERC RAPID conference

Initially it was reported as a 30% reduction:

The NewScientist.com news service reported on 30 November 2005 that the National Oceanography Centre in the UK found a 30% reduction in the warm currents that carry water north from the Gulf Stream from the last such measurement in 1992. The authors note that currently the observed changes are "uncomfortably close" to the uncertainties in the measurements. However, the North Atlantic is currently warmer than in the earlier measurements. This suggests that either the circulation is not weakening, or that, even if it is weakening, the weakening is not having the hypothesised cooling effect, or that other factors are able to overwhelm any cooling. See Decrease in Atlantic circulation? by Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann on the RealClimate website. Wiki

Failing ocean current raises fears of mini ice age
18:00 30 November 2005
NewScientist.com news service

Decrease in Atlantic circulation?
30 Nov 2005
Real Climate

Here's some related info:

Current velocities of the Gulf Stream
Delft Institute for Earth-Oriented Space Research (DEOS)

Gulf Stream Shutdown Information site

Abrupt Climate Change Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

It would stand to reason that a weaker Atlantic current would make the Atlantic basin's cyclogenesis potential greater in 2005, due to hot pools of water building up. Now that El Nino is here and the current is strong, we didn't get much of any tropical development in the 2006 Atlantic hurricane season.



[edit on 29-10-2006 by Regenmacher]

Yes, I saw the story. Of course it's worrying. My concern was less as I read elsewhere that the Gulf-stream has stopped before--sometime in the 80's I think. Maybe that is incorrect? Not that that makes it better, it's just I'm kinda resigned to this already.

I previously looked into this, and for those in the UK, to help you sleep better, I've read the temeperature will fall about 4 degrees Celsius only. Not a new ice-age. As I understand it, the UK's climate is mild more because it is an ocean climate. Even w/out the gulf-stream, it will still be comparatively mild. However, Norway would get hammered. And N.America too I'm afraid. Continental climate, cold air cooled by land. The east coast would freeze. This double-sucks as this is where I am.

Originally posted by Regenmacher
Current velocities of the Gulf Stream
Delft Institute for Earth-Oriented Space Research (DEOS)

This is the place that changed its reporting only weeks after the supposed shutdown took place. Very suspicious in my book.

Originally posted by alphabetaone
Also, Indy, im curious have you gone to the ThermoSalinity charts from the ARGO Data Buoy array site (at Coriolis, or any other Data Collection Public site) to try and determine the variance for yourself for say a given period of perhaps 3 months prior, during and 3 months after? I think that may well show from their archives whether or not there was a shutdown that was never publicized and we should be worried about.

I haven't seen the charts. But I did get an image from Delft on June 30th, 2004 which showed a very weak current at the time. This image came before they altered their data reporting. Only way you are going to know if the gulf stream stops now is if the entire Atlantic stops moving.

[edit on 10/29/2006 by Indy]

This article refutes the claims that the gulf stream shutting down would lead to an ice age in Europe, and if it did shut down it would only affect temperatures by a few degrees.

Here's some snippets, there's a lot more info at the link:



Interesting article, and makes note that mainscream media tends to screw up real science.

I'll let Sheryl Crow sum it up for me:

Everyday Is A Winding Road

I hitched a ride with a vending machine repair man
He says he's been down this road more than twice
He was high on intellectualism
I've never been there but the brochure looks nice
Jump in, let's go
Lay back, enjoy the show
Everybody gets high, everybody gets low,
These are the days when anything goes

Everyday is a winding road
I get a little bit closer
Everyday is a faded sign
I get a little bit closer to feeling fine....

[edit on 30-10-2006 by Regenmacher]

Originally posted by Regenmacher
Here's some snippets, there's a lot more info at the link:

The Source of Europe's Mild Climate - American Scientis
The notion that the Gulf Stream is responsible for keeping Europe anomalously warm turns out to be a myth

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

I've read it, I've read it all. And all I can say is, that the "well-worn piece of climatological nonsense", as the authors call the predominant theory on the Gulf Stream's influence on the climate of Western Europe, is based on more facts and, most important, real observations than their piece of manipulated computer emulated "science" is.

Everything comes down to believes, science too, as long it's dealing with hyphothesis. And nothing is truely independent, least of all science. At least to some degree they have to accomodate their masters in order to get fed.

This bogus piece of science I just don't buy.

Why? Because I'm from a Scandinavian country, one benefitting most from the central heating system of the Gulf Stream, which whole existence is dependent on this "climatological nonsense", and I'm old enough to have watch whether patterns over more than five decades.

The authors suggests that shuting down our heating system and only relying on the chilly winds to sustain climate, wouldn't cause much change. Experts surely are the far most dangerous ignorants among ignorants.

They are generally relied on, but outside their tiny pinpointed field they know obsolutely nothing. Mr Seager and Battisti clearly have now ideas about biological sciences.

Most life forms are tolerable only within narrow bounds of few, sometimes fraction of degrees. Thought it to be common knowledge, sound judgement. But it might be factors too unscientific to experts.

If they had had common sense, they wouldn't have brought the image graph, titled fig 6. It shows the temperature distribution WITHOUT the GS flowing versus WITH it flowing. The overall picture doesn't reveal any big difference. That especcially holds true concerning the North American Continent, and - as that most likely is the origin of their employer - they only looked at that.

So typically American... isn't it? Not scientific at all.

Well, I've I took the freedom of looking at the area of interest to ME. And this is what their image, supposingly supporting their claim: THE GULF STREAM DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE, showed.


_ EUROPE WITH THE GULF STREAM _ EUROPE WITHOUT THE GULF STREAM _

It makes ALL THE DIFFERENCE.

In the "WITH THE GULF STREAM", notice what lies between the "0" and "5" degree marker. UK, France, Benelux, N. Germany and the borders of southern Scandinavia. Observe the same areas on the "WITHOUT THE GULF STREAM". They have now moved within the "0" to "-5" markers.

That makes all the difference to agriculture and most species living there. Makes the difference between life and death.

This common knowledge even climatologists should know.

Lost my trust in American Scientist.


[edit on 31-10-2006 by khunmoon]

People should take special note of britian being at roughly the same lattitude as newfoundland, and yet their climates are completely different. Thats largely because of the gulf stream.

Its not just a matter of england having warmer weather because of the gulf stream though. THe gulf stream is part of the system of north atlantic deep water formation, which is largely driven by salinity dependant density of water. Interupting or altering the formation of north atlantic deep water almost certainly will have major consequences on global climate, forget about britain. At the very least we're talking about cutting off heat flow to the north.



[edit on 31-10-2006 by Nygdan]

Thanks for your support Nygdan, you touch a topic I intended to mention in my above post. But got carried away in the bogus detail.

To set the geographical record straigtht concerning the position of Europe:
Southern Scandinavia from Denmark up to Stockholm is on latitude with Yukon and Anchorage.
London, Frankfurt on latitude with the southern parts of Hudson Bay,
South of France with the Great Lakes,
Madrid with New York.

Miami are on latitude with Cairo and Kuwait.

The topic I intended to tell was how the thermohaline circulation, or simply the "Atlantic conveyor" still is the main, if not only reason as to why Europe enjoys a relatively mild climate - as you can see from the geographical pinpointing, relative mild to latitude. Nygdan gets at it in his post.

THe gulf stream is part of the system of north atlantic deep water formation, which is largely driven by salinity dependant density of water. Interupting or altering the formation of north atlantic deep water almost certainly will have major consequences on global climate, forget about britain. At the very least we're talking about cutting off heat flow to the north.

That's what it is and what is refered to as the thermohaline circulation. It is a conveyor belt running through all the Oceans of the World. You cut it in one place, it's cut all over the globe.

The American Scientist study denying the Gulf Stream benificial to Europe, has none the least some interesting graphical imagies. Here is one showing that thermohaline conveyor belt.


Figure 3. Thermohaline circulation—often dubbed "the ocean conveyor belt"—carries warm surface waters (pink) from the tropics to the North Atlantic, with the return flow at depth (purple).
Illustration after Wallace Broecker, modified by Ernst Maier-Reimer, courtesy of CLIVAR International Project Office.
__________________________________________________________________

You can see it's an unbroken loop running, of at first cold salinated water from the bottom of the Atlantic all of its lehgth North South down to Anarctica, circumflows to go back up in the Indian Ocean before it start its northbound journey, now as a warm current riding on the surface of the ocean. As you also can see it's intermingling with a loop pumping some of the cold deep sea water cross equator to heat it up, let it surface and go back in the conveyor. I think it is fair to see it as one long twisted loop.

Apperantly what makes it go round are those two pumps, the one in the North Pacific to soak it up from the bottom, and the one in the Arctic Sea to make it sink down again.

Being an inhabitant in one of those countries dependent on that phenomenon, we've had awareness on it for years. The conveyor belt mechanisme is a discovery not more than a decade old, I think, but is already common knowledge in an enviromental minded country like mine.

The pump mechanism was from first on given a very appropiate name. "The Lung of the Arctic Sea" it came to be called. The allegory quite poetic, I think, and truely correct. When that lung collapses, it's the end of us (for a couple of thousand years).

It has happened before and it will happen again; the signs right now being worrying. Partly collapses have happened in recent times. In the 16th-17th century such an incidence occured, coinciding with the 30 year war that ended up in the Treaty of Westphalia, the forerunner of napolonic times and modern Europe.

I mention it because I think they are connected. Be it the climate itself, or as have been suggested in connection with climate change, unusual solar activity, also being the cause of change in the systems and hierarcies of power.

As for the present state of the Gulf Stream, I don't see no need being a scientist to understand with the icecap melting off, Anarchtica breaking off piecies big as countries, sealevel generally rising - and in my opinion - mainly caused by human activities - that the salination factor sooner or later will drop below a level critical to uphold "The Lung of the Arctic Sea" process.

In fact other scenarios, scientifical founded, talk about it might all together reverse. Instead of pumping down warm water it will be spewing up cold water. Like the Pacific pump does now. No computer model to my knowledge can simulate the amount of affect that will cause to the global climate.

Generally speaking computer models and climate change, there just ain't enough data avaliable to give them a minimum of reliability. Concerning meteorology, I've heard said, to make reliable forecasts more than 1 or 2 days ahead, you would need sensors in every sqare foot of the biosphere. Still a while ahead.

Until then climatology as a science is at best nothing more than believes.

At worst it is conceit, a bogus to serve intended purposes.


[edit on 31-10-2006 by khunmoon]

Originally posted by Indy

Originally posted by Regenmacher
Current velocities of the Gulf Stream
Delft Institute for Earth-Oriented Space Research (DEOS)

This is the place that changed its reporting only weeks after the supposed shutdown took place. Very suspicious in my book.

Yes. VERY suspicious.

...and not the only reporting system that's being censored and manipulated.

Under the circumstances, we can only believe the worst.

Excellent thread btw Indy. Thanks.


.

Originally posted by khunmoon

This bogus piece of science I just don't buy.

Rather than slinging emotionalisms as proof of flawed science, let's stick to factual matters. Richard Seager's analysis is more plausible than Matthew Maury based theories, and back in 1855 Maury had little idea how solar radiance variability, NAO, ENSO, MJO, and MOC effects Euro-weather. Maury based his conclusion without knowing all the facts and to continue to build upon a flawed hypothesis or trying to fit the data to prove his hypothesis is just more bad science.

The main contention was atmospheric circulation is the principle force that drives ocean currents and warms Europe. The common knowledge that "all people" should know is that our weather starts at the sun in which it warms our Earth and drives our winds. The Gulf stream is wind driven, the winds are still blowing and will continue to blow...were as orographic forcing by the Rocky Mountains and the jet stream has more to do with keeping northern Europe warm than does current variances in the Gulf Stream. Seager didn't say that the THC doesn't have an impact Britain and Europe either and is more likely to just mitigate some of the effects of anthropogenic warming.

This article looks into changes in solar radiance triggered the Younger Dryas:

Reduced solar activity as a trigger for the start of the Younger Dryas?
The Netherlands Centre for Geo-ecological Research (pdf file)

Abstract: It is generally assumed that changes in ocean circulation forced the abrupt climate changes during the Late Pleistocene, including the Younger Dryas event. Recently, however, it was proposed that variations in solar irradiance could have played a much more prominent role in forcing Pleistocene climate changes. For climate fluctuations during the Holocene the role of solar variability as an important forcing factor becomes more accepted. Furthermore, two physical mechanisms were recently published that explain how relatively small changes in solar irradiance could have had a strong impact on the climate system.

We discuss the possibility that an abrupt reduction in solar irradiance triggered the start of the Younger Dryas and we argue that this is indeed supported by three observations:

(1) the abrupt and strong increase in residual C at the start of the Younger Dryas that seems to be too sharp to be caused by ocean circulation changes alone.

(2) the Younger Dryas being part of an 2500 year quasi-cycle ,also found in the C record, that is supposedly of solar origin.

(3) the registration of the Younger Dryas in geological records in the tropics and the mid-latitudes of the Southern Hemisphere. Moreover, the proposed two physical mechanisms could possibly explain how the North Atlantic thermohaline circulation was perturbed through an increase in precipitation together with iceberg influxes. In addition, the full magnitude of the Younger Dryas cooling as evidenced by terrestrial records in Europe could be explained. We conclude that a solar triggering of the Younger Dryas is a valid option that should be studied in detail with climate models.

2012 is forecasted to be the record setting major peak in our next solar cycle, and Europe's mild climate is due to "a combination" of atmospheric circulation and the wind driven Gulf Stream. So don't plan on it getting any sort of Pleistocene ice age anytime soon based on a single short term ocean current study.

ATS: Weather is changing rapidly in The Netherlands
-as in too warm even though the gulf stream is reported to have slowed.

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer

[edit on 18-11-2006 by Regenmacher]

RegenMacher - I agree that solar activity as well as cycles and events in the galaxy and cosmos can affect earth's climate.

At the same time, the Ocean Conveyor appears to a have an immediate and direct effect on weather and climate - more so than any other part of the system.

Recognizing that we need to take a systems approach - are you saying that the Ocean Conveyor (thermohyaline circulation) has relatively minor impact? Or that other factors are in play and may override its impact? Or what?


.
wd

[edit on 18-11-2006 by soficrow]

Originally posted by soficrow
Recognizing that we need to take a systems approach - are you saying that the Ocean Conveyor (thermohyaline circulation) has relatively minor impact? Or that other factors are in play and may override its impact? Or what?

The data that the gulf stream is slowing down towards a stop and/or that it portends cooler euro-weather is questionable at best, and to assume Europe is solely dependent on the gulf stream for its continued mild climate is also erroneous. There's far too many variables and factors at play to make such a wild call, or anyone would be able to predict long range climate trends.

To sum it up: weather forecasting that focuses on a few or single observation(s) in order to foment an apocalyptic scenario is more aptly called wishcasting.







[edit on 18-11-2006 by Regenmacher]

My main sources of information are academic - not journalistic (as are the sources you cite).

A key overview of the Ocean Conveyor's role in abrupt climate change is from the Wood's Hole Oceanographic Institution.

I am open to seeing some contradictory research. Got links?

Thanks, sofi