Climate

tl;dr: Another paper on the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation shutdown just dropped, bumping the reduction of circulation by the year 2100 from 32 ± 37% to 51 ± 8%. This means it is now certain that there will be catastrophic consequences through this particular form of climate change. Capitalist media don't tell you this because they're capitalist.

The catastrophic consequences include, but are not limited to:

• Even more extreme hurricanes in the Caribbean

• European biosphere freezing to death in cold snaps

• European infrastructure collapsing in cold snaps

• Faster-rising sea levels on the north American east coast

• Extra CO2 released from the Antarctic Ocean

:-(. Been watching this happen for much of my life. No sane person wants this to happen. sigh.

The part about the economist which "modelled" the impact of climate change and came up with hilariously optimist results that aren't anywhere close to those from the Scientists from hard-sciences is just so typical.

Economists lying with models (i.e. basically using Mathematics as a layer of complexity hidding purposeful lies, so as to deceive those with little familiary with the Scientific Method or modelling) is THE main tool that has been used to push Neoliberal politics for 5 decades and created the shit we're living in.

I worked in Finance and am intimatelly familiar with how you can make Mathematical Models to produce whatever the fuck effect you want: mainly by the formulas you chose for your model and by chosing what types of inputs it takes you can make a "machine" which will produce a specific fable from genuine real-life data.

Mind you, the Scientists and other people with Science Training won't be deceived, but that doesn't matter because those "models" and their "results" (generally produced in Think Tanks funded by the very people whose interests are, by an amazing coincidence, served by politicians acting as if the model is genuinelly representative) aren't meant to convince domain experts, they're meant as technocratic "arguments" for articles and opinion pieces in the Press to sway public opinion (or at the very least spread doubt on the consensus of the actual domain experts) and as a cover for the bought up politicians to chose the policies benefitting the interests of those who are or promise to be "good friends" to them.

Well that was a fun read just before bed.