
Europe Is Warmer Than Canada Because of the Gulf Stream, Right? Not So Fast - georgecmu
http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/2013/02/europe-is-warmer-than-canada-because-of-the-gulf-stream-right-not-so-fast/
======
merraksh
_In climate modeling studies where the Gulf Stream was artificially swept out
of existence, the temperature differences between eastern Canada and western
Europe persisted._

Okay, so the Gulf Stream does not play any role. But then, in the very next
sentence:

 _So what’s really going on? According to Riser and Lozier, the cause of the
temperature difference is likely a complex interaction between the surface
ocean, the Gulf Stream, massive upper atmospheric currents and differences in
pressure on either side of the Atlantic._

So the Gulf Stream does get in the equation. One of these two sentences is
incorrect.

~~~
jessaustin
Maybe the differences persisted because they were built into the model using a
mechanism other than the Gulf Stream? Maybe the model was based on some other
assumption that implicitly produces the differences?

Models seem very easy to do poorly. They seem basically impossible to do well.
The question, "how would temperature differences between North America and
Europe change if the Gulf Stream ceased?" is not of a scientific nature.

~~~
cpleppert
>>Models seem very easy to do poorly. They seem basically impossible to do
well.

Yes, insufficient understanding of the phenomena will often produce bad
results. It doesn't matter whether the explanation is a model or hypothesis.
Rigorous analysis and verification is required.

>>The question, "how would temperature differences between North America and
Europe change if the Gulf Stream ceased?" is not of a scientific nature.

Thats equivalent to stating that the effect the gulf stream has on temperature
differences between North America and Europe is impossible to discover
scientifically.

------
tokenadult
Where does this leave us in understanding public policy related to climate
issues? Do we have enough understanding of climate influences to know which
influences may need policy interventions in the current haphazard pattern of
global human behavior?

~~~
ChuckMcM
It has been posited in the press and in movies, that a warmer earth would melt
the poles which would reduce salinity and then 'stop' the flow of the Gulf
Stream current. That would plunge Europe into an ice age. Deeper analysis
casts doubt on both sides of this proposition, either a) that the gulf stream
current would stop, and b) if it did, that it would cause an ice age in
Europe.

Living in California we've had about three major theories about the impact of
the pacific current applied and then found wanting on California weather.
There is an effect, but the extent that the weather is affected is not easy to
predict.

------
xefer
This 2006 article from American Scientist went into this issue in great
detail:

[https://www.americanscientist.org/issues/pub/2006/4/the-
sour...](https://www.americanscientist.org/issues/pub/2006/4/the-source-of-
europes-mild-climate/1)

------
rvkennedy
It is by no means clear that this is the accepted view of the mainstream of
climate scientists - the linked papers seem to be the work of a couple of
groups banging the drum against the Gulf Stream. I'd wait a while before
accepting this as the new orthodoxy.

------
quink
> Take a gander at this map, and you’ll see the red line marking the 50th
> parallel, a line of equal latitude that runs a full circle around the Earth.
> Every point on this line is the same distance from the equator, and the same
> from the frozen pole.

There are 360 degrees in a circle, not 400. 360/8 = 45. Of course, there's
some slight variation because the earth isn't an exact sphere, but it doesn't
add up to 5 degrees.

I'm going to read on, but that's really a very disappointing start.

Of course, the alternative explanation is that what they meant was that each
of these points has the same distance to the pole and the same distance to the
equator as every other point, but the wording doesn't seem to indicate that,
and if that was the intent it was a badly written sentence.

~~~
bmm6o
It's ambiguously worded, but I don't read that to imply that he thinks every
point on the 50th parallel is equidistant from the pole and the equator. Break
the clauses into separate sentences and you'll see what I mean:

Every point on this line is the same distance from the equator. Every point on
this line is the same distance from the frozen pole.

These are both true sentences, they just don't refer to the same distance.

