Updated December 15, 2025 by Elisa Branda
This interview conducted by the famous PIT YouTube channel Adam Kadmond, who has been involved for years in the analysis of major global transformations, in the defense of the principles of social justice and in proposing concrete readings and solutions to emerging critical issues, collects a direct dialogue, without frills, on what many avoid naming: the collapse of fundamental climate systems And its practical consequences for everyday life, agriculture, human health, and social justice.
Adam Kadmon synthesizes decades of observations, data, and warnings into a simple and, for some, uncomfortable message: the climate is entering a new phase of instability that requires radical choices, including ethical ones.
The substantial difference compared to many climate narratives is that here we don't speak in slogans, nor to generate sterile fear. Adam Kadmon leads us along a logical path: data → mechanisms → impacts → responsibilities → choices. The message is uncomfortable not because it is apocalyptic, but because forces us to look at reality without ideological filters.
I therefore invite you to carefully watch the video below where you can find the entire interview, from which I have then collected the main points below.
Watch the PIT Interview with Adam Kadmon now
Let's watch the video together where we can listen to the full interview with Adam.
A point that emerges forcefully in the video
During the interview, Adam insists on a key concept that is often removed from public debate:
the problem is not just environmental, it is systemic.
Climate, economy, social justice, health, and geopolitical stability are not watertight compartments. Slowing AMOC, deadly heat waves, food crises, and forced migration are different manifestations of the same imbalance: a system that has exceeded the biophysical limits of the planet while continuing to behave as if they were infinite.
This step is crucial because it shifts the discussion from “What will the weather be like?” a “What kind of society do we want to be?”.
An important detail emerged in the video: the speed of change
Adam points out that the real perceptual error is thinking in linear terms.
Complex systems they do not change gradually, but for thresholds:
- for years it seems to "hold"
- then, in a few years, everything changes
This applies to the AMOC, the food system, and even social stability. This is why waiting for "clear signals" is dangerous: when they become evident, it's often too late to intervene softly.
A warning that is not born today
One element that makes this interview particularly significant is that the topics addressed do not represent a sudden discovery or a reaction to the latest current events. Adam Kadmon has been talking about systemic instability, climate crisis, limits to growth and the fragility of the global economic model for many years., when these topics were often relegated to the margins of public debate or dismissed as alarmism. For example, we can read his articles on his official blog. https://777babylon777.blogspot.com/, starting February 7, 2005. Adam had also talked about it on the radio in 2009 and on television since 2011.
I leave you an extract of his first article of 2005 where he writes:
"Air pollution will increase global temperatures and thus cause ice to melt.
So at some point the Gulf Stream will stop. When it stops completely, humanity will only discover it after 15 years."
In unsuspecting times, well before extreme events, record heat waves and food chain crises became daily experience, Adam had already indicated the direction of the coming changes, insisting on a key point: These are not isolated events, but convergent signals of a system that is overcoming its limits..
The value of this continuity is not only "having been right", but having maintained a consistent line, based on data, observation and an ethical reading of the consequences, always trying to infuse his tales with concrete teachings capable of making a real difference. Not a sensationalistic prediction, but a long-term effort that is now supported by scientific evidence and facts.
What is AMOC and why should we care?
AMOC stands for Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, the great Atlantic "conveyor belt." It's a massive system of currents that moves warm water northward (think Gulf Stream) and cold, denser water southward along the ocean floor. This heat transfer regulates the climate of vast swathes of the globe, from North America to Western Europe, and even the distribution of nutrients and oxygen in the oceans.
Why is it crucial? Because if this set of currents slows or stops, the consequences are immediate and profound: much colder winters in Europe, accelerated sea level rise along some coasts (with severe impacts on cities like New York and Miami), shifting monsoons, droughts in some regions and floods in others, collapse of fishing systems, and, in turn, food crises and conflicts.
“The AMOC isn't just a current: it's the climate regulator for half the world. If it stops, it can't be fixed later. If it collapses, it will take centuries, perhaps millennia, for it to restart.” — Adam Kadmon
What are the concrete signs that the AMOC is weakening?
Data shows that AMOC today is at weakest level in the last 1.600 yearsBetween 2004 and 2024 it lost about 15% of its strength. In the North Atlantic, a “cold spot"—a sign that heat is no longer arriving as it once did. Scientists have used early warning indicators (increased variability and loss of resilience) that suggest the critical threshold may have been approached or exceeded in the last 10–15 years.
These signals are measurable physical changes, not isolated hypotheses: they indicate that the system is losing stability and that the probability of collapse is significantly increasing.
Why is the AMOC weakening? What is causing this process?
According to Adam, the two main causes are both induced by human activity:
- Melting ice, especially in Greenland: the enormous influx of fresh water into the Atlantic makes the surface water less salty and therefore less dense, preventing the sinking that “pushes” the deep circulation.
- Global warmingSurface water is warmer and takes longer to cool; if it doesn't cool, it won't sink and the circuit will jam.
This combination shuts down the engine that keeps the ocean conveyor belt moving. The problem is that these processes have inertia: the heat and water released into the ocean remain there for decades, so even a rapid reduction in emissions won't have an immediate effect on the state of the AMOC.
How imminent is the risk of collapse? When might we see dramatic effects?
The most recent estimates (2023–2025 studies) indicate that the collapse of the AMOC could occur as early as 2035 and 2050, just as Adam had indicated in the past, well before the most optimistic projections of 2100. This does not mean that the collapse will suddenly occur tomorrow, but that the system has entered a trajectory of loss of stability that could lead to the critical threshold in a few decades.
It is important to understand the time scale: if the fall lasts 15–30 years, for those decades we will see increasing climate impacts and transformations that will influence agriculture, fisheries, migration and geopolitics.
Can we still prevent it, or should we prepare for a post-AMOC world?
The right question — Adam underlines — is not “can we still prevent it?” but “How far along are we in the process already?“The data suggest that the tipping point may already have been approached or crossed: even if we were to zero out all emissions tomorrow, the AMOC could continue to weaken for decades due to the system's inertia.
This leads to a twofold need:
- Mitigation: reduce emissions as quickly as possible to limit further damage and slow the path towards the critical threshold.
- Adaptation: design and implement resilience plans to manage climate change already underway and the inevitable changes in the near future. Equity issues arise here: nations with greater resources (the USA, Europe, China) can afford costly adaptation measures; many fragile areas (Africa, Southeast Asia) are at risk of devastation.
In short: Plan A (total prevention) may be insufficient or come too late. A Plan B is also needed, with adaptation measures and a more equitable global response.
Is there a physiological limit to the heat the human body can tolerate?
Yes: the physiological limit is described by the wet-bulb temperature (wet bulb temperature — TWU). Cooling of the human body depends on the evaporation of sweat; when the air is saturated with humidity, sweat no longer evaporates effectively. 35°C wet-bulb, even a healthy person, at rest and in the shade, can die in about 6 hours from hyperthermia.
Recent history and worrying projections:
- In 2022, wet-bulb temperatures of 33–34 °C were recorded in Pakistan and Iran.
- In 2023, Florida experienced wet-bulb events around 88°F (31°C) that caused illnesses and deaths among outdoor workers.
- According to the Global Wet Bulb Temperature Risk Index (2024), by 2050, Pakistan, Bangladesh, northeast India, and the Persian Gulf could experience wet-bulb temperatures exceeding 35°C for 10–30 days per year; Egypt, Sudan, and Iraq could experience deadly heatwaves 2–3 times per year.
- In sub-Saharan Africa, approximately 300 million people will live in areas with lethal wet-bulb disease by 2040, but many of these populations will not have access to electricity for air conditioning.
The “geography of heat death” is therefore clear: it will disproportionately affect areas with fewer resources, worsening existing inequalities.
How does all this translate into food risk: will the global food system hold up?
The global food system is surprisingly efficient—but fragile. Much of the world depends on a few large "breadbaskets." Today about 70% of the world's wheat comes from three areas: the Russian/Ukrainian steppe, the US/Canada central plain, and the Argentine pampas. If two of these areas experience failures in the same year (due to drought, floods, or war), global prices explode and can trigger famines. In 2022, we saw how the war in Ukraine, combined with drought in Argentina and other factors, put global grain supplies in crisis.
With climate change, the probability of simultaneous failures It's growing exponentially. It's not just wheat: rice, corn, and other strategic crops are at risk in different parts of the world for different reasons (drought, floods, extreme heat). The expected consequences include: cyclical food crises and increasingly violent by 2040.
What concrete solutions exist to make the food system more resilient?
Adam indicates some practical and very urgent lines of action:
- Crop diversification: reduce dependence on a few global crops and favor resilient local varieties (quinoa, millet, taro, etc.).
- Regenerative agricultureHealthy soils retain more water and are less prone to erosion and yield loss; practices such as crop rotation, managed grazing, and the use of cover crops help.
- Decentralization of production: investing in local and urban agriculture (gardens, hydroponics) to reduce long supply chains and vulnerability to global shocks.
- Funding and political willToday, the world spends far more on fossil fuel subsidies than on agricultural resilience. A shift in priorities in public and private budgets is needed.
Without political will and targeted investments, even the best technologies and crop alternatives will remain marginal.
Is infinite economic growth compatible with the survival of humanity?
The answer is clear: no. Economic growth based on the continued consumption of energy and finite resources is incompatible with a planet that is exceeding its biophysical limits. Today we consume about 1,7 planet Earths per year — a figure that clearly shows how the current model is unsustainable if extended to all of humanity at the same level of consumption as Europe or the United States.
Per remain below the 1,5°C threshold — a threshold that makes the difference between lives saved and lives lost — global emissions must be halved by 2030. This requires significant annual reductions in rich countries (about -7% annually) and different collective and individual behaviors: fewer private planes, less disposable fashion, and a reduction in non-essential energy consumption.
According to many studies, so-called "decoupling" (decoupling between growth and emissions) is only partially possible, and not on a global scale. The proposed alternative is a care-based economic model: measuring well-being by health, leisure time, relationships, and ecological stability rather than GDP. A just transition—including redistribution of resources and equity policies—is essential to prevent the climate crisis from translating into inequality and conflict.
What concrete changes can a person make today to help avoid the worst?
Adam doesn't just talk about collective responsibility: he also highlights practical choices that anyone can adopt, with concrete impacts if multiplied on a large scale:
- Reduce meat consumption, especially that bovineAnimal agriculture is responsible for around 14,5% of global emissions and requires a lot of land and water (up to 15.000 litres of water are needed to produce 1 kg of beef, compared to around 1.500 litres for 1 kg of grain).
- Limit the use of cars and airplanes Whenever possible, favor public transport, trains, and low-impact alternatives.
- Reduce food wasteThrowing away less food is one of the most concrete and immediate actions.
- Support policies and leaders who propose Just transitions and investments in agricultural and infrastructure resilience.
- Participate in local initiatives: shared gardens, community water projects, mutualistic actions that strengthen social resilience.
It's not about justifying individual action as sufficient, but about recognizing that the sum of individual and collective choices can still make a significant difference.
Is the future already written? Can we still hope to build something different?
Adam summarizes clearly: the planet will not die; Earth has faced and overcome far more extreme conditions. What human civilization is at risk of disappearing as we know it, because our socioeconomic system only functions in a relatively stable climate. The choices made in the coming decades will determine how violent the transformation will be.
The alternative isn't utopian: it's a concrete choice between two ethical and practical scenarios. We can choose to close ourselves off and defend resources with bunkers and walls, or we can choose communities of mutual support, resource sharing, and cooperation. History shows that organized communities survive, not isolated individuals.
In practical terms: there is room for action, but it's narrow. Making immediate changes—drastically reducing emissions, making different consumption choices, investing in agricultural resilience and social infrastructure—can avoid the worst, or at least mitigate it. But a profound cultural transformation is needed: debunking the myth of infinite growth, restoring value to life and mutual care.
Why Adam talks about ethical choices (not just technical ones)
A central point of the video is that technology alone is not enough.
Even with renewables, advanced agriculture, sophisticated climate models, one unavoidable question remains:
Who will be protected and who will be sacrificed?
Climate adaptation, if not guided by equity criteria, risks creating a two-speed world:
- air-conditioned, protected, insured areas
- exposed areas, without access to energy, water, healthcare
This is where Adam speaks openly about climate justiceWithout redistribution of resources and global cooperation, the climate crisis becomes a permanent humanitarian crisis.
The final message of the interview
Adam doesn't propose a nihilistic vision. On the contrary, the final message is surprisingly lucid:
- The future is not written
- ma the window of maneuver is narrowing
- and what will make the difference is not individual heroism, but the collective ability to cooperate
A simple and powerful concept comes back several times in the video:
Civilizations do not collapse for lack of resources, but for the inability to adapt together.
Quick Answers: Key Points to Remember
- AMOC is vital: without it, much of the Earth's climate would change dramatically.
- Signs of weakening are already present and the time frame is ten years (2035–2050 possible collapse).
- Wet-bulb at 35°C is lethal: millions could be exposed to lethal conditions as early as 2050.
- The food system is fragile due to concentrated production: diversification and regeneration are urgently needed.
- Infinite economic growth is incompatible with planetary limits: we need a just transition to a care economy.
- The fundamental choice is ethical: bunkers for the few or communities for the many?
FAQ
The AMOC is the system of currents that transfers heat from the equator to the North Atlantic. It influences seasonal temperatures, precipitation patterns, and ocean currents: if the AMOC slows, regions like northwestern Europe may become colder in winter, while other areas experience drastic changes in monsoons and precipitation.
It's not absolutely inevitable, but the signs of weakening are clear, and the likelihood of reaching a critical threshold is growing. Immediate actions to reduce emissions are also essential, but the system's inertia makes it likely that adaptation plans will still be needed.
Wet-bulb temperature measures the combination of temperature and humidity that determines how effectively sweating cools the body. At 35°C (95°F) wet-bulb, the human body can no longer cool itself and can die within hours, even when resting in the shade.
Areas such as Pakistan, Bangladesh, northeastern India, and the Persian Gulf are identified as potentially exceeding 35°C wet-bulb temperatures for sustained periods by 2050. Parts of sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia are also highly vulnerable.
Yes, but it requires political will, significant investment, and time. Strategies include crop diversification, regenerative agriculture, decentralized production, and incentives for local, climate-resistant crops. Currently, however, much more investment is being made in fossil fuels than in agricultural resilience.
Reduce meat consumption (especially beef), limit unnecessary flights and car travel, reduce food waste, support ambitious climate policies, and participate in community initiatives for local resilience (shared gardens, water resource management, self-help groups).
It's not too late to avoid worst-case scenarios, but it's too late to keep the world exactly as we've known it. We can still choose how to distribute the losses and how to build more just and resilient systems. What's at stake is the survival of large segments of humanity and the quality of future life.
Conclusion: Which side do you want to be on?
The words collected here are not an apocalyptic cry in and of itself, but a call to collective responsibility.
The climate crisis is not an inevitable fate, but a choice that recurs every day. Not choosing is already a choice. To continue to delay means accepting a more violent, more unequal, and less humane world.
This interview does not ask you to believe, but to understand. He doesn't ask you to be afraid, but to take responsibility.
The real question that remains open is not “will it happen?”, but:
Which side do we want to be on when this is happening?
This interview is a reminder: get informed, speak up, act. It's time for immediate and courageous decisions.
Thanks to PIT (follow their YouTube channel in this page) for making this interview possible and Adam Kadmon (find out more about Adam Kadmon's world in his Official site) to continue, by any means possible, to defend and help humanity. If you found this article interesting, I invite you to share it and, above all, to share the video of the interview.
YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN:
