Yawn. Yet another possible, hand wavy, scientifically ambiguous-in-the-context-of-a-deeply-complex-system tipping point for the sake of hammering home a deeply politicized subject. Yes, I understand that we're affecting the global climate in long-term ways, but if any of those who really push these narratives want to actually start convincing the general public to give a shit, they can start by not turning out at least one new dramatic headline per week while most people keep perceiving more or less manageable climates year over year.
Academics don't understand the climate and never did.
One counterexample does not invalidate the general upward trend in global temperatures or the intensification of weather extremes.
It invalidates the expertise of the people making those claims and predictions, meaning you should deeply interrogate the other things they told you. Or you can continue to believe everything told to you by people who predicted with 100% certainty continuous ice loss and then took 20 years to notice they were wrong.
No climate scientist ever claimed to be 100% certain.
“You scientists think you’re so smart telling me to stop hitting my head with a frying pan, but look, I’m still conscious! Didn’t see that one coming, did you? You know NOTHING!” Bang bang bang bang…
And somebody doesn't know that the Arctic and Antarctica are two different places...
If you read more than the headline you'd realize that this article does not support your boffins-know-nothing stance.
Yeah? Which bit do you think turns "we are baffled and surprised by reality" into these people being "boffins"?