If we haven’t fired the clathrate gun already, I’m personally convinced it is inevitable in the next ~decade. Practically no one I talk to, who are generally concerned about climate change, have the same fear I do about the clathrate gun and most just point to the Wikipedia article downplaying it as “proof” it isn’t a big deal. While it is super depressing to think we have already lost the climate change battle, intelligent people keeping their heads in the sand and not seriously looking at what the next steps are assuming the clathrate gun has already fired are doing a huge disservice to humanity. Absolutely none of the 2030/2050/2100 climate change measures are taking this into account and it is mind boggling to me.

Note the "current outlook" section, where the TL;DR: is that this is not happening and there is pretty good reason to believe it won't over predictable time-frames.

> the "current outlook" section

from the article:

> according to data released in January by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

an encyclopedia like Wikipedia is, by its very nature, going to lag behind the cutting edge of published research on this topic.

this article might eventually become a source cited in an edit to the Wikipedia page for that "current outlook" section.

The NOAA data is about methane in general, not clathrates.