nattopizza

Turiel is a physicist and the other two commenters are telecommunication engineers. The paper itself, which I read, states that salinity has increased and previous stratification has been disrupted. And that's where they stop because that's what the data tells them. Then they say that we need to perform more studies to understand what's going on, which is the logical conclusion. There is no mention of "doubling of co2 emissions" or "deep Southern ocean circulation has reversed completely" in the study.

I tried looking up Sam Carana and found nothing about him. What climate science credentials does he have?

> You can argue with the author of the study saying that but I can't see an issue with an article reporting that they did, if that's what actually happened.

I think that's kind of the point: nobody knows if that's what actually happened and the study doesn't show any information to support any specific theory. I could be that (though I think it would be unlikely as we'd have probably seen a real steady decline in the ice sheet and not an up and down up), something else that is still concerning but not as severe, or maybe something that we didn't now before and is not as concerning.

He's the only that says something that drastic in the article, and he's a physicist, not a climate scientist. The other two comments are from telecommunication engineers. I'd wait a bit to see what the general climate science community has to say about the study. Based solely on the facts reported in the paper I'd say the most worrying point is precisely that we don't know what's going on.