U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse
rguiscard
379 points
249 comments
June 04, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 104.6ms across 10,500 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- Dismay as Trump officials to dismantle key ocean monitoring system ndsipa_pomu · 19 pts · June 03, 2026 · 74% similar
- Trump Administration to Dismantle Ocean Monitoring System scoofy · 25 pts · June 01, 2026 · 72% similar
- Feds will abruptly dismantle system monitoring climate change, oceans OutOfHere · 13 pts · June 11, 2026 · 67% similar
- Scientists warn Atlantic current at risk of shutting down ambigious7777 · 158 pts · May 10, 2026 · 66% similar
- A 'cold blob' in the Atlantic could be a sign of AMOC shutdown tambourine_man · 203 pts · June 14, 2026 · 55% similar
Discussion Highlights (20 comments)
dinosaur0001
I hate this timeline
nixass
This is what you get when worm infested brains lead the country
honeycrispy
Can someone explain to me why we should continue to pay to track these currents? Genuine question.
cyberax
Don't look up!
stldev
This makes sense. Facts cease to exist because you ignore them. I think Huxley wrote that.
kombine
Let's not forget those from the big tech (you know the names) who kneeled before the king.
rdedev
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
SilverElfin
Terrible. The infrastructure installed in the oceans was meant to last 25 years. Instead after 10 years (or less for some), we are going to spend 1.5 years removing it all. It’s not surprising though. Manipulating data and availability data is a regular government practice now. And it’s not just a Trump or Republican thing either. For example crime stats in blue cities often tell a misleading story, and can be influenced by rule changes on what gets counted.
maebert
> 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
snaking0776
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.
Eufrat
Deutsche Physik, but with more idiots.
jimjimjim
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"?
tdb7893
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.
dotcoma
That will fix it!
wnevets
"If We Stop Testing, We’d Have Fewer Cases" - Trump
efitz
This was the most one-sided article I’ve seen in a while. I didn’t see one word describing why the administration felt this was the correct decision. All I saw was moral judgment and condemnation, as if describing the actual motivations of the actors would have been a pointless exercise. I’m not defending the administration. I know nothing about Atlantic currents or this particular monitoring project or the groups that operated it. But I do know that there are two sides to every conflict. This article failed on any level to help me make an informed decision. And the one-sided presentation makes me much more suspicious of the motives of the publisher and therefore of the validity of their position.
iqp
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!
frogperson
The tumor continues to grow, everyone knows its getting worse daily. Still no one dare speak of the cure.
laylomo2
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?
kevin_thibedeau
Don't Look Up was supposed to be satire.