New study by Falkena et al. shows that most climate models don’t capture the established key mechanism that can destabilize the North Atlantic subpolar gyre. Those models that get it predict abrupt subpolar gyre changes in the coming decades 😳. esd.copernicus.org/articles/…

Oct 23, 2025 · 10:31 AM UTC

Here’s a reminder how closely the sea-surface temperature response to an #AMOC slowing matches what is actually observed in the past decades in the Atlantic. More on that here: realclimate.org/index.php/ar…
4
28
74
Replying to @rahmstorf
Of course, your idiotic climate models only capture the imaginary human input while completely ignoring the natural cycles connected to what you scientists call the "Bond Events." The Little Ice Ages of 1300 and 536, the Bronze Age Collapse around 1000 BC, the 4.2 kiloyear event, the 5.9 kiloyear event, the 8.2 kiloyear event, the Younger Dryas, etc. — you ignore geomagnetic excursions, Grand Solar Minima, and so on.
3
3
16
Replying to @rahmstorf
Game-changing findings! If models predict abrupt gyre changes, let’s act faster. Climate resilience can’t wait. 🌊
5
Replying to @rahmstorf
U cant predict shit if the complete atmosphere is being subjected to so much experimentation, every loonatick is testing his own chemical mix by now
2
1
3
Replying to @rahmstorf
It never ceases to astound me that they entirely ignore the last interglacial.
1
4
Replying to @rahmstorf
Who has paid the study? You still believe in models? How many assumptions has this model? What happens when you negate the assumptions?
2
4
Replying to @rahmstorf
They don't "predict" anything. They "project" stuff, all based on the assumptions, speculations and guesses put into them. You should know that as you have been speculating and guessing things for years now.
2
3
Replying to @rahmstorf
Can you explain this a simple soul like me. Will the warm gulf stream stop working?
2
2
Replying to @rahmstorf
Yeah, well most of this thread has the IQ of burned toast.
1
Replying to @rahmstorf
Bull shit.
1
Replying to @rahmstorf
yep, just what we need, another climate model garbage in, garbage out
1
Replying to @rahmstorf
Ooh ooh! More predictions.
1
Replying to @rahmstorf
They said that in the 1980s too. Bullhockey!
1
Replying to @rahmstorf
North Atlantic gyre shifts hinge on subsurface feedbacks-if models can’t resolve these, we risk missing abrupt climate changes. Improving convective processes should be at the forefront of model development.
1
Replying to @rahmstorf
please get a new profile picture, this looks like right from scientology
1
Replying to @rahmstorf
Wie krude wieder einmal, Alarmisten auf Achse. Es wird wird immer angenommen man verstehe chaotische Systeme, das sind leider nur Träume, die lassen sich eben nicht mit mir der Realität in Einklang bringen, so schön es auch wäre etwas kontrollieren zu können.
Replying to @rahmstorf
This is all „Theoretical assumptions and nonobserved facts“ (Leontieff)
Replying to @rahmstorf
Wann beinhalten die Modelle endlich die Wolkenbildung?
Replying to @rahmstorf
Excellent.
Replying to @rahmstorf
Nice BS shill bot
Replying to @rahmstorf
Predictions are difficult, especially about the future.
Replying to @rahmstorf
Breaking news: all climate models fail the reality test. All climate models' predictions are nonsense.
Replying to @rahmstorf
Interesting information
Replying to @rahmstorf
Oh Gott - der Zusammenbruch der thermohalinen Zirkulation wurde uns doch schon in den 90ern prophezeiht! Gibt´s keine aktuelleren Weltuntergänge? 🥱
Replying to @rahmstorf
Models are bs, they never ever had it right. It is just politics claiming to be science.
2
Replying to @rahmstorf
Potsdam institute...right. Where Rockström got sent to. Very objective. Keep trying. co2coalition.org/facts/
1
2
Replying to @rahmstorf
The earth is flat you sneaky bugger you.😅😅😅🤡
1
Replying to @rahmstorf
its another scam tweet. but Stefan won't read that LOL
1
Replying to @rahmstorf
Well, they do not capture O2. So they are worthless.