Latest news with #TheDayAfterTomorrow
Irish Examiner
23-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Irish Examiner
How do some blockbuster disaster movies stack up against real science?
From fiery asteroids to rogue planets, humanity's fascination with its own demise has fuelled countless blockbuster films. End-of-the-world movies captivate us with their spectacle and suspense, but how do they stack up against real science? Let's explore some iconic apocalypse films and rate which ones get close to plausible science and which ones veer into pure fantasy. The scientifically plausible, kind of… Deep Impact (1998) Deep Impact starring Robert Duvall, Téa Leoni, Elijah Wood, Vanessa Redgrave, Maximilian Schell, and Morgan Freeman Plot: A comet is on a collision course with Earth, threatening mass extinction. Science Check: This one gets a lot right. Comets (icy, rocky bodies from the outer solar system) could indeed strike Earth, as they have in the past (think of the Chicxulub impact that wiped out the dinosaurs 66 million years ago — although this is widely believed to have been caused by an asteroid not a comet). The film's depiction of a global effort to deflect the comet with nuclear weapons aligns with real-world concepts like NASA's planetary defence strategies, including the Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) mission, which successfully altered an asteroid's orbit in 2022. Where it stretches plausibility is in the timeline, detecting a comet just months before impact is unlikely with today's tech, which can spot near-Earth objects years in advance. Still, the tsunami-causing aftermath of a smaller fragment hitting the Atlantic? That's a chillingly realistic touch. Accuracy Rating: 7/10. Nails comet impacts and deflection but stretches the detection timeline. The Day After Tomorrow (2004) The Day After Tomorrow starring Dennis Quaid, Jake Gyllenhaal, Sela Ward, Emmy Rossum, and Ian Holm Plot: Climate change triggers a sudden ice age, with superstorms and flash-freezing chaos. Science Check: This film takes a kernel of truth and runs wild with it. The idea of a disrupted Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), a key ocean current that regulates global climate, has basis in science. Studies suggest that melting polar ice from climate warming have weakened this system, and under high emissions scenarios it could collapse, which would cool Europe and the planet overall; however, scientists aren't sure about the timing this could happen — it's a hot (or cold) topic. But the movie's hyper-accelerated timeline (days instead of decades) and dramatic effects, like tornadoes shredding Los Angeles or New York freezing solid in hours, are pure Hollywood. Real climate shifts are gradual, not instant, and liquid nitrogen-style freezing of humans? Thermodynamically absurd. Accuracy Rating: 4/10. AMOC disruption is real, but the rest is cinematic craic. Interstellar (2014) Anne Hathaway as Amelia in Interstellar. Picture: Warner Bros/Paramount/Melinda Sue Gordon Plot: Earth becomes uninhabitable due to crop failures and dust storms, prompting a search for a new home via a wormhole. Science Check: Interstellar earns points for ambition. The film consulted physicist Kip Thorne, ensuring its wormhole and black hole visuals (like Gargantua's accretion disk) were grounded in relativity theory. Crop blight wiping out food supplies is a plausible threat, fungal pathogens and climate change do endanger global agriculture. However, the idea of Earth becoming a dust-choked wasteland in mere decades is exaggerated; such a collapse would likely take centuries. The wormhole? Theoretically possible, but we've no evidence they exist or could be navigated. Accuracy Rating: 7/10. Blight and dust are credible, but the speed and wormhole travel are speculative. The scientifically absurd Armageddon (1998) Armageddon with Bruce Willis Plot: A Texas-sized asteroid threatens Earth, and oil drillers are sent to nuke it from the inside. Science Check: Armageddon is a rollercoaster of nonsense. An asteroid that big (1,000 km wide) would obliterate Earth on impact, no drilling required. Splitting it with a nuke wouldn't work either; you'd need energy far exceeding all human-made explosives combined, and the fragments would still rain down catastrophically. Plus, training drillers to be astronauts in days? NASA would sooner train astronauts to drill. It's a thrilling ride, but it's about as scientific as a cartoon. Accuracy Rating: 1/10. Gets the asteroid threat vaguely right but flunks physics and logistics. 2012 (2009) 2012 starring John Cusack, Thandiwe Newton, Danny Glover, and Woody Harrelson Plot: Neutrinos from a solar flare heat Earth's core, causing continents to shift and mega-tsunamis to ensue. Science Check: This one's a doomsday fever dream. Neutrinos, near-massless particles that pass through matter, are incapable of heating Earth's core. Science says no, but the film says 'yes, and here's tsunamis'. The idea of 'solar flares' triggering pole shifts or crust displacement is geological gibberish, plate tectonics don't work that way, and shifts take millions of years, not hours. The arks saving humanity are a nice touch, but the science here is a Mayan prophecy-level stretch. Accuracy Rating: 0/10 —Pure fantasy with zero scientific grounding. The Core (2003) The Core: In a last-ditch effort to restart the planet's failing magnetic field, scientists and astronauts must set off a nuclear device at the center of the Earth. 2003 film starring Aaron Eckhart, Hilary Swank, and Stanley Tucci Plot: Earth's core mysteriously stops spinning, so a team drills down to detonate nukes and restart it. Science Check: Where to begin? The core stopping would take an incomprehensible force (far beyond anything natural) and would disrupt Earth's magnetic field gradually, not instantly. Drilling to the core is impossible with current tech; the deepest hole ever (Kola Superdeep Borehole) reached just 12 kilometres, versus the 2,900 kilometres to the outer core. And nukes restarting it? Angular momentum doesn't work like a car engine. This film's a wild sci-fi romp, not a science lesson. Although there is a factually correct documentary by the same name... and I know a lecturer who accidentally played the wrong core movie to their university class. They shall remain anonymous. Accuracy Rating: 0/10. A wild sci-fi ride with no scientific legs. Why we love the apocalypse anyway Whether they nail the science or fling it out the window, end-of-the-world films tap into our primal fears and hopes. Films such as Deep Impact and Interstellar remind us of real threats, asteroids, climate change, resource depletion, while offering heroic solutions. Meanwhile, Armageddon and 2012 lean into absurdity, prioritising explosions over equations. Scientifically accurate or not, they all ask: How would we face the end? And that's a question worth pondering, even if the neutrinos stay harmless and the core keeps spinning. So, next time you're watching an apocalyptic blockbuster, enjoy the ride and just don't bet on it being a documentary.
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
A crucial system of ocean currents is slowing. It's already supercharging sea level rise in the US.
Flooding on the US Northeast coast has risen significantly as a critical network of Atlantic Ocean currents weakens, according to a new study — an alarming glimpse into the future as some scientists warn the current system could be just decades from collapse. The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, known as the AMOC, works like a vast conveyor belt, transporting heat, salt and freshwater through the ocean and influencing climate, weather and sea levels around the planet. Coastal flooding is caused by a cluster of factors, chief among them climate change-driven sea level rise, but the AMOC also plays a critical role in the Northeast, according to the study published Friday in the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Scientists used data from tide gauges — instruments which monitor sea level change — combined with complex ocean models to calculate how the AMOC has affected flooding in the region over the past decades. They found between 2005 and 2022, up to 50% of flooding events along the northeastern coast were driven by a weaker AMOC. Drilling down, that means AMOC-driven sea level rise contributed to up to eight flood days a year over this period. The models used by the scientists also give a glimpse into the future, allowing them to forecast coastal flooding frequency in the Northeast up to three years in advance, according to the study. The idea that the AMOC is influencing sea level rise in this region is not new, but this study is the first to find it's substantially affecting flood frequency, said Liping Zhang, a study author and project scientist at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. There are two main reasons why the AMOC affects sea level rise, said David Thornally, professor of ocean and climate science at University College London, who was not involved in the research. A strong AMOC is typically associated with dense deep water that flows along the western boundary of the North Atlantic. When the AMOC weakens, water becomes less dense, literally taking up more space and fueling sea level rise. A weaker AMOC also affects the flow of the Gulf Stream, causing water to flow back onto the coastal shelf and increasing sea level rise at the coast. Rising seas are a huge and urgent issue for society as the climate warms, making it vital to better understand how it's being affected, Zhang told CNN. Coastal flooding can 'reshape the coastal environment… (and) poses threats to both lives and infrastructure in coastal regions,' she said. The findings will be very useful for helping society better predict and plan for costly and devastating flooding events, UCL's Thornally told CNN. 'A study like this is a good way to demonstrate the day-to-day impacts of changes AMOC, rather than invoking dramatic scenes from Hollywood disaster movies which are exaggerated and thus easily dismissed,' he told CNN, referring to the movie The Day After Tomorrow, which depicts the world plunging into a deep freeze after the AMOC collapses. As the research relies on climate models, the results will depend on how well these represent the physics of the real world, he cautioned. 'The high resolution means it probably does a good job — and it can mimic observed sea-level patterns — but it won't be perfect,' he said, especially as this is a complex area of the ocean where different currents meet. Gerard McCarthy, an oceanographer at Maynooth University in Ireland, also not involved in the research, said the study is significant because it shows 'how AMOC can help predict sea level extremes along this coast.' A slew of recent research has pointed to signs the AMOC could be on course to significantly weaken over the next decades as climate change warms oceans and melts ice, disrupting its delicate balance of heat and salinity. This would have catastrophic planetary impacts, including on sea level rise. 'The science is still not clear,' McCarthy said, but a collapse would be a 'high-impact event and it is critical that we know what to expect.'
Buzz Feed
16-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Buzz Feed
Austin Nichols Says He Shouldn't Have Kissed 15-Year-Old Mary-Kate Olsen In "Holiday In The Sun"
This is Austin Nichols. You might have seen him in stuff like the classic CW TV show One Tree Hill, as well as movies like The Day After Tomorrow and Wimbledon. Back in 2001, Austin starred in the film Holiday in the Sun, which was one of the many direct-to-video Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen films that you, dear reader, may have been raised on. In the film, Austin — who was born in 1980 and is currently 44 years old — shares a kiss with Mary-Kate, who was born in 1986 and is 38 years old. The film came out in November of 2001, so if you operate under the assumption that it was filmed some time in the year before release, Mary-Kate was somewhere between 14 and 15 years old — and Austin was between 20 and 21 years old. Obviously, just the idea of a 14-or-15-year-old engaging in a romantic kiss with a 20-or-21-year-old good. In a recent interview on the Drama Queens podcast, Austin got real about just how not good it felt to act out the scene at the time. 'I was definitely nervous because Mary-Kate was 15, and I was, I think, 18 or 19, or maybe even 20," Austin said. "I don't remember, but I was too old. And it felt weird, and it felt wrong." 'And I looked very young, so watching the movie, I don't think you notice. I'm real tall and skinny and nerdy. But I don't think you can tell there's a big age difference. But from my brain, I was like, 'She's 15. This is weird.'"
Euronews
27-02-2025
- Science
- Euronews
Computer simulations show collapse of vital Atlantic current that warms Europe unlikely this century
The nightmare scenario of Atlantic Ocean currents collapsing, with weather running amok and plunging Europe into a deep freeze, looks unlikely this century, a new study concludes. In recent years, studies have raised the alarm about the slowing and potential abrupt shutdown of the Atlantic end of the ocean conveyor belt system. It transports rising warm water north and sinking cool water south and is a key factor in global weather systems. A possible climate change-triggered shutdown of what's called the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation or AMOC could play havoc with global rain patterns, dramatically cool Europe while warming the rest of the world and raising sea levels on America's East Coast, scientists predict. It's the scenario behind the 2004 fictionalized disaster movie 'The Day After Tomorrow,' which portrays a world where climate change sparks massive storms, flooding and an ice age. Scientists say this should be a 'reassuring' finding Scientists at the United Kingdom's Met Office and the University of Exeter used simulations from 34 different computer models of extreme climate change scenarios to see if the AMOC would collapse this century, according to a study in Wednesday's journal Nature. No simulation showed a total shutdown before 2100, said lead author Jonathan Baker, an oceanographer at the Met Office. This is no greenlight for complacency. The AMOC is very likely to weaken this century and that brings its own major climate impacts. Jonathan Baker Lead author and oceanographer at the Met Office It could happen later, though, he said. The currents have collapsed in the distant past. Still, the computer simulations should be 'reassuring" to people, Baker said. 'But this is no greenlight for complacency,' Baker warned. 'The AMOC is very likely to weaken this century and that brings its own major climate impacts.' How is global warming changing the Atlantic current? The Atlantic current flows because warm water cools as it reaches the Arctic, forming sea ice. That leaves salt behind, causing the remaining water to become more dense, sinking and pulled southward. But as climate change warms the world and more freshwater flows into the Arctic from the melting Greenland ice sheet, the Arctic engine behind the ocean conveyor belt slows down. Previous studies predict it stopping altogether with one of them saying it could happen within a few decades. But Baker said the computer models and basic physics predict that a second motor kicks in along the Southern Ocean that surrounds Antarctica. The winds there pull the water back up to the surface, called upwelling, where it warms, Baker said. It's not as strong, but it will likely keep the current system alive, but weakened, through the year 2100, he said. Baker's focus on the pulling up of water from the deep instead of just concentrating on the sinking is new and makes sense, providing a counterpoint to the studies saying collapse is imminent, said Oregon State University climate scientist Andreas Schmittner, who wasn't part of the research. Those Southern Ocean winds pulling the deep water up act 'like a powerful pump keeps the AMOC running even in the extreme climate change scenarios,' Baker said. As the AMOC weakens, a weak Pacific version of it will likely develop to compensate a bit, the computer models predicted. How is an AMOC shutdown defined? If the AMOC weakens but doesn't fully collapse, many of the same impacts - including crop losses and changes in fish stock - likely will still happen, but not the big headline one of Europe going into a deep freeze, Baker said. Scientists measure the AMOC strength in a unit called Sverdrups. The AMOC is now around 17 Sverdrups, down two from about 2004 with a trend of about 0.8 decline per decade, scientists said. One of the debates in the scientific world is the definition of an AMOC shutdown. Baker uses zero, but other scientists who have warned about the shutdown implications, use about 5 Sverdrups. Three of Baker's 34 computer models went below 5 Sverdrups, but not to zero. That's why Levke Caesar and Stefan Rahmstorf, physicists at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Research and authors of an alarming 2018 study about the potential shutdown, said this new work doesn't contradict theirs. It's more a matter of definitions. 'An AMOC collapse does not have to mean 0 (Sverdrups) overturning and even if you would want to follow that definition one has to say that such a strong AMOC weakening comes with a lot (of) impacts,' Caesar wrote in an email. 'The models show a severe AMOC weakening that would come with severe consequences.'
Euronews
27-02-2025
- Science
- Euronews
Europe deep freeze from Atlantic current collapse unlikely this century, computer simulations show
The nightmare scenario of Atlantic Ocean currents collapsing, with weather running amok and plunging Europe into a deep freeze, looks unlikely this century, a new study concludes. In recent years, studies have raised the alarm about the slowing and potential abrupt shutdown of the Atlantic end of the ocean conveyor belt system. It transports rising warm water north and sinking cool water south and is a key factor in global weather systems. A possible climate change-triggered shutdown of what's called the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation or AMOC could play havoc with global rain patterns, dramatically cool Europe while warming the rest of the world and raising sea levels on America's East Coast, scientists predict. It's the scenario behind the 2004 fictionalized disaster movie 'The Day After Tomorrow,' which portrays a world where climate change sparks massive storms, flooding and an ice age. Scientists say this should be a 'reassuring' finding Scientists at the United Kingdom's Met Office and the University of Exeter used simulations from 34 different computer models of extreme climate change scenarios to see if the AMOC would collapse this century, according to a study in Wednesday's journal Nature. No simulation showed a total shutdown before 2100, said lead author Jonathan Baker, an oceanographer at the Met Office. This is no greenlight for complacency. The AMOC is very likely to weaken this century and that brings its own major climate impacts. Jonathan Baker Lead author and oceanographer at the Met Office It could happen later, though, he said. The currents have collapsed in the distant past. Still, the computer simulations should be 'reassuring" to people, Baker said. 'But this is no greenlight for complacency,' Baker warned. 'The AMOC is very likely to weaken this century and that brings its own major climate impacts.' How is global warming changing the Atlantic current? The Atlantic current flows because warm water cools as it reaches the Arctic, forming sea ice. That leaves salt behind, causing the remaining water to become more dense, sinking and pulled southward. But as climate change warms the world and more freshwater flows into the Arctic from the melting Greenland ice sheet, the Arctic engine behind the ocean conveyor belt slows down. Previous studies predict it stopping altogether with one of them saying it could happen within a few decades. But Baker said the computer models and basic physics predict that a second motor kicks in along the Southern Ocean that surrounds Antarctica. The winds there pull the water back up to the surface, called upwelling, where it warms, Baker said. It's not as strong, but it will likely keep the current system alive, but weakened, through the year 2100, he said. Baker's focus on the pulling up of water from the deep instead of just concentrating on the sinking is new and makes sense, providing a counterpoint to the studies saying collapse is imminent, said Oregon State University climate scientist Andreas Schmittner, who wasn't part of the research. Those Southern Ocean winds pulling the deep water up act 'like a powerful pump keeps the AMOC running even in the extreme climate change scenarios,' Baker said. As the AMOC weakens, a weak Pacific version of it will likely develop to compensate a bit, the computer models predicted. How is an AMOC shutdown defined? If the AMOC weakens but doesn't fully collapse, many of the same impacts - including crop losses and changes in fish stock - likely will still happen, but not the big headline one of Europe going into a deep freeze, Baker said. Scientists measure the AMOC strength in a unit called Sverdrups. The AMOC is now around 17 Sverdrups, down two from about 2004 with a trend of about 0.8 decline per decade, scientists said. One of the debates in the scientific world is the definition of an AMOC shutdown. Baker uses zero, but other scientists who have warned about the shutdown implications, use about 5 Sverdrups. Three of Baker's 34 computer models went below 5 Sverdrups, but not to zero. That's why Levke Caesar and Stefan Rahmstorf, physicists at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Research and authors of an alarming 2018 study about the potential shutdown, said this new work doesn't contradict theirs. It's more a matter of definitions. 'An AMOC collapse does not have to mean 0 (Sverdrups) overturning and even if you would want to follow that definition one has to say that such a strong AMOC weakening comes with a lot (of) impacts,' Caesar wrote in an email. 'The models show a severe AMOC weakening that would come with severe consequences.'
