U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse
- What really puts all of this into perspective for me is I work in academia and one of my friends works for a defense contractor. He told me the maintenance cost per flight hour of F-35 was a bit more than $40k, which is significantly more than I make in a year as a grad student. It's crazy basic science is what's been the focus of so many cuts while it's so cheap.
- > Democrats in Congress have said they will “fight” plans to dismantle the system
Putting “fight” into quotes here is terrific amount of low level shade for a scientific publication. chef’s kiss
- I wish I could find it but Simon Clark, someone who specialized in climate science, had put out a video about how we were only recently able to model the AMOC and it's shifting patterns thanks to this measurement we were doing
Edit: probably not this one but atleast tells us why measurement is needed https://youtube.com/shorts/-X5EhUbzLTY?si=_N92PNUiTi3STat6
- Let's not forget those from the big tech (you know the names) who kneeled before the king.
by egonschiele
0 subcomment
- It's important to note that thousands of people are giving their time every day for climate change work, doing thankless jobs for very little pay. The fact that the US chose a corrupt man over these people, the fact that millions of people sat out the vote, is a real slap in the face of the people who try to fight this, day after day after day. And many young people seem to have just given up. It's your future, others are fighting for it, join them.
- This makes sense.
Facts cease to exist because you ignore them. I think Huxley wrote that.
by frogperson
0 subcomment
- The tumor continues to grow, everyone knows its getting worse daily. Still no one dare speak of the cure.
- Those who voted for this: are you happy here?
- I'm asking in good faith here. If it's so critical, then why couldn't the same data be collected and published by another sovereign nation?
by 1970-01-01
0 subcomment
- American science now needs to be tied with a military project so it has very sharp teeth to defend its upkeep. It's possible to track both submarines and ocean health with an all-in-one, billions-of-dollars expensive network.
- "Bad voting" has consequences that excede the scope of the term: Re-installing them will be more difficult and expensive than simply dismantling them. These kind of objectively-destructive things should be far more difficult to execute.
by kevin_thibedeau
1 subcomments
- Don't Look Up was supposed to be satire.
- Deutsche Physik, but with more idiots.
- Here's a frankly better article from the NYT:
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/01/climate/ocean-observatori...
A few points:
1. The ocean observation system began operating in 2016 and was expected to continue for 25 years.
2. It cost $48 million annually to operate the network. The Trump administration repeatedly tried to shutter it, proposing to cut its funding by 80 percent in both 2025 and again in 2026. Congress pushed back, restoring the money.
3. “One of the real tragedies here is that collecting data effectively at this site was a huge engineering challenge, and it’s not the kind of thing where you can just leave your notes for the next person who comes in,” Dr. Palevsky said. “There’s a lot of expertise that has the potential to be lost.”
The administration is, as I understand it, in violation of the constitution by shutting this down. It was funded by Congress, twice. The executive branch cannot just legally not spend that money.
by thelastgallon
0 subcomment
- Carl Sagan on Military Spending and Climate Change: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C6co5qXEE4
How much money do you think the United States has spent since 1945 on the Cold War? $10 trillion (in 1990).
- This is what you get when worm infested brains lead the country
by contubernio
0 subcomment
- A time honored practice of dysfunctional institutions when confronted with a problem is to stop paying any attention to it. Problem gone. It's one of the derivatives of quality control.
- Just one more thing that is being destroyed. There are thousands more that you aren't hearing about. If it exists then it must be destroyed. The intention is nothing less than to make rebuilding impossible. If you still have illusions that the US government has not been taken over by a death cult yearning for the apocalypse then you need to put down your phone and look at the scale of what is happening. Legality means nothing; they are doing everything they can to ensure that there will be no institutions left to hold them accountable.
by SubiculumCode
0 subcomment
- Vote next November like your country depended on it (it does), even if orange guy sends right wing goons to terrorize swing districts. Vote.
by newtwentysix
0 subcomment
- The Atlantic Currents are at risk of collapse , or is it the system ?
- Any journalist investigating this would be advised to follow the money.
by insane_dreamer
0 subcomment
- To be clear: this is not about saving money -- in fact it's expensive to remove all this equipment
This is about removing the ability to measure in order to undercut the claims of global warming ("we don't have sufficient evidence")
In the future historians will look back at this administration the way we look at the Roman Inquisition who persecuted scientists for challenging their accepted dogma.
- We gave up taxpayer-funded sex reassignment surgeries for inmates for this crap.
- So you will jump in?
The EU?
Russia?
My bet is on China
by jimjimjim
4 subcomments
- Just doing random evil things for no benefit? At this point it's just wanton vandalism. Punks in suits smashing windows and setting fire to cars.
Can anyone here, hand of heart, say "I agree with this decision"?
by internet_points
0 subcomment
- Paul Samuelson: When events change, I change my mind. What do you do?
Trump: If we stop testing right now, we’d have very few cases, if any.
Previously https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5733236-gallup-stops-pres...
- 10 years from now:
Climate Activist: The oceans are getting warmer & global currents are threatened by imminent collapse - we must do something!
Big Oil: Prove it!
Climate Activist: Data gathered between 2016 and 2026 shows ...
Big Oil: That's old news! Do you have more recent data?
Climate Activist: Well, no, because Trump2 dismantled the ocean observation system in 2026 ...
Big Oil: So you have no data to back up your claims?
Climate Activist: Not recent data, no, but ...
Big Oil: Case dismissed! Why should anyone take action based on subjective opinion, not backed up by hard data? For all we know the oceans could have miraculously cooled & the currents are fine!
- Don't look up!
by fuckinpuppers
0 subcomment
- I hope they’re able to pause this before they start destroying it.
But like the east wing I’m
sure they’ll do it before there’s a chance.
Fuck this timeline
by snaking0776
1 subcomments
- This strikes me as one of the recent moves by our political/capital class where they think that if they just remove the information that’s inconvenient for them, people will stop caring and let them do what they want. You only need to listen to the bosses who so many of us work for to know that they think climate change is just an inconvenience in the way of progress. Only time will tell if this strategy will work or not.
- "If We Stop Testing, We’d Have Fewer Cases" - Trump
- That will fix it!
by dinosaur0001
1 subcomments
- I hate this timeline
by TesterVetter
0 subcomment
- [dead]
by SilverElfin
2 subcomments
- [flagged]
by honeycrispy
16 subcomments
- [flagged]
- [flagged]
by x-complexity
2 subcomments
- > ... “removal of all in-water infrastructure” belonging to the Ocean Observatories Initiative at sites along the coasts of Oregon, Washington, Alaska, and North Carolina, and in the waters between Greenland and Iceland.
...Why is Europe reliant on the US for monitoring oceans between Greenland & Iceland, i.e within European territory & therefore European monitoring? Shouldn't they have their own infra to work from?
by cryptoegorophy
3 subcomments
- Article seems a bit biased. Similarly like some other ones where he cut research funding to then later resume it, with almost no significant loss, but the Democrats cried about it all over like if funding was completely stopped. They always tell one side of the story that fits the narrative.
Just to be clear I am against this as well, just the journalism is so filthy now.
Hacker News