In response to George Monbiot's recent article on the weakening of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC), scientists Andrew Watson and Phil Williamson emphasize the importance of precise language when discussing climate risks. Monbiot's article, published on 23 April, highlighted a recent paper suggesting that some scientists believe the AMOC is more likely than not to 'collapse', implying a complete halt.
Weakening vs. Collapse
Watson, professor emeritus at the Global Systems Institute, University of Exeter, clarifies that the paper actually projects an increased chance of the AMOC weakening by 50% by the end of the century under continued fossil-fuel emissions. While concerning, this is a slowdown, not a collapse. The outcome is not certain, and with sustained efforts to reduce emissions, there is still time to avoid the worst outcome.
'What the science is saying is that the fate of the AMOC is in the balance and actions we collectively take now to influence it,' Watson writes.
Language of Climate Crisis
Williamson, honorary associate professor at the School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, notes that the Guardian changed its style to 'global heating' seven years ago, and later to 'climate emergency, crisis or breakdown'. He argues that Monbiot's article justifies a further shift to 'climate chaos' or 'climate catastrophe'.
He points out that while heating continues in many regions, there is growing scientific concern about a severe rearrangement of the climate system, with disastrous winter cooling occurring simultaneously. Such changes have happened before in Earth's history and could be too rapid for effective adaptation, though not as sudden as depicted in the 2004 film The Day After Tomorrow.
Call for Action
Both scientists stress the need for accurate communication to avoid public despair. Exaggerating the response from 'weakening' to 'collapse' gives the impression that disaster is inevitable, when in fact there is still a window for action. The AMOC's fate depends on collective efforts to reduce emissions and mitigate climate change.
The letters were published in response to Monbiot's article and reflect ongoing debates among scientists about how to convey climate risks without causing paralysis.
