keith, you're an odd fellow that appears to keep like-minded company.

Daviy,

"As an example for a short time recently the ocean currents stopped flowing. That is cause for real alarm if it is a trend but it may have been a one off event"

Dont be so silly. As long as the earth rotates, and the winds blow the currents are not going to stop, period.

bigmal

The mechanics are that the sea cools and sinks at the poles drawing water in from the equator. As the surface flows from the equator the cool water on the ocean bed flows to the equator to be warmed so that it rises and again get drawn to the poles. This is how the oceans stays aerated. If the flow stops the seas will stagnate and sea life will die. The seas rising is one of the inconveniences of GW. The possibility of stagnant dead seas is one of the disastrous possibilities. The winds also follow the same equator/pole circulation patterns. Is there anyone who can explain the mechanics better than I can?
This is a long way from the original article but I think it needed to be answered.
The GW debate is not just about rising seas and hotter weather although you could be forgiven for believing this because of the lack of publicity the real issues get. The real issues include dead stagnant seas turning to acid. High levels of rain, but it will be acid rain originating from the dead seas. No fresh drinking water. And it goes downhill from there.
I hope the 'do nothing' brigade understand the consequences of getting this one wrong. I am not saying they are wrong. In fact I sincerely hope they are right.

Daviy (I have been preoccupied elsewhere).

Your last comment is wrong (bigmal is part right).
We will be in deep poop if the THC (ocean conveyor belt) stops, but only alarmists are suggesting this will happen anytime soon - it won't.

If you want to learn more about these systems, you could start here:

http://www.oceanmotion.org/html/background/ocean-in-motion.htm

I will try to engage with this thread later

Some more quotes from "the science of reviewing peers", etc.:

Dr Phil Chapman, geophysicist, astronautical engineer and first Australian to become a NASA astronaut:

"All those urging action to curb global warming need to take off the blinkers and give some thought to what we should do if we are facing global cooling instead. It will be difficult for people to face the truth when their reputations, careers, government grants or hopes for social change depend on global warming, but the fate of civilisation may be at stake".

David Packham, ex-CSIRO principal research scientist, senior research fellow in a Monash University climate group, and an Australian BoM officer:

"The global warming monopoly is seriously bad for science".

Dr Art Raiche, ex-CSIRO Chief Research Scientist:

"It is my strong belief that the CSIRO has passed its use-by date. The organisation that bears the name of CSIRO has very little in common with the organisation I joined in 1971, one that produced so much of value for Australia during its first seven decades. ...consider the Garnault report, possibly the longest economic suicide note in Australia's history. It is based on the dire predictions of CSIRO's modelling programs".

Q&A
I hope you see from my posts that I am not being pedantic on this one. It is a complex area and full of more questions that answers. I gave the worst case predicted. What is wrong is for bigmal to call an idea 'silly' when many scientists say the cessation of ocean currents is a real possibility.
'Stefan Rahmst, a professor of ocean physics at Potsdam University in Germany believes the chance of an ocean current shutdown is 30%.'
http://www.esnips.com/doc/550cad66-5d45-4a1e-8a0f-a571fc711531/Global-Warming--Ocean-Currents

The major pattern for both wind and ocean is between poles and the equator.

Acting like a conveyor belt, the current transports warm, surface waters toward the Poles and cold, deep waters toward the Equator.
In the Atlantic Ocean, these warm surface waters push northward, releasing heat into the atmosphere and becoming cooler and denser. As they do, the waters sink and flow southward in the deep ocean. http://oceanmotion.org/html/impact/globalwarming.htm

As with the wind there is the macro and the micro. There are also 'spirals' in the wind (micro) patterns as the move from the equator to the poles (Macro). Both the wind and the oceans rely on temperature differential from equator to poles to keep them going.
See also.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/06/0627_050627_oceancurrent.htm
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/oceans.htm
http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=12457&tid=282&cid=9206

This is a complex issue. Getting back to the original article. The opposing views of scientist may depend on the models the scientists are using. And of course if any of the models have any degree of validity.

In the debates I take part in on global warming I am careful to make my position clear. On this issue I do not know. Nobody knows. It is all judgment on limited and imperfect information. I hope that soon somehow we will have definite information one way or the other so we could work together to do what needs to be done (or not done). Until then I will work with the worse case in the hope that my fears are unfounded.

In the meantime bigmal, please be careful that you understand the issues before calling anyone or anything in this debate 'silly.