reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Geologists have been studying climate for centuries, while climate science is a relatively new field. The speaker criticizes climate scientists as obscure and unemployable academics funded by taxes. They argue that evidence from the past shows that the Earth has experienced six ice ages, with periods of ice expansion and contraction. The current interglacial period started 34 million years ago, and during the last interglacial, sea levels were higher and temperatures were warmer. The speaker questions claims of record-breaking temperatures, pointing out that in the past, temperatures have been even hotter. They also mention that we have just come out of a little ice age, so it's not surprising that temperatures have been rising. The speaker dismisses the significance of carbon dioxide emissions, stating that the current levels are low compared to geological history and that reducing it would harm plant and animal life.

The speaker questions whether the planet is warming and if it should be our main concern. They explain that while temperatures have been unusually high in recent times, this warming trend started over 300 years ago during the little ice age. Proxy data, such as ice core and sediment data, is used to estimate temperatures from hundreds of thousands of years ago. The speaker argues that throughout history, warmer periods, like the medieval warm period and the Roman warm period, were beneficial for humanity and led to flourishing civilizations. They suggest that we should celebrate warming and increasing carbon dioxide levels as they have positive impacts on Earth's ecosystems and human conditions.

Climate change is a fact, but humans are not causing it. NASA knows that over 90% of the CO2 is coming from the oceans. Is there more CO2 now than ten, twenty, fifty, or a hundred years ago? The answer is absolutely yes. Is it a bad thing? The answer is no. We're right about 440 parts per million right now. In geologic history, Cretaceous and Jurassic were over a thousand parts per million; Triassic, 2,000 parts per million. The earth was lush. CO2 levels and temperatures are not always one-to-one. Where's the CO2 coming from? NASA knows: the CO2 is coming from the oceans warming from underneath. Warm water holds less gas. The oceans are warming from underneath from tectonic processes every twelve thousand five hundred years, beginning in the core and causing more tectonic and volcanic activity, which is exactly what we're seeing.

The speaker argues that life on Earth is in crisis due to crop failure, social and ecological collapse, and mass extinction, framing these as part of Extinction Rebellion’s climate alarmist narrative and a broader political and financial “climate industrial complex” that aims to control purchases, diet, and travel in the name of sustainability and net-zero emissions. They contend that people rely on governments and the media rather than data, and promise to show that temperatures fluctuate, are not unprecedented, and that natural disasters are not getting worse. They claim climate data is unreliable and that CO2 plays a small role in climate, while presenting scientific evidence that we are not in a climate crisis. Using a 65-million-year temperature graph, the speaker states the Earth today is in a cool period and is coming out of an ice age, noting that life thrived in much warmer times without human CO2 emissions. They assert that over the last two thousand years there have been two warm periods and two cold periods, including the Roman warm period, the cold Dark Ages, the medieval warm period, and the Little Ice Age, with current warming described as a recovery from the Little Ice Age. The three degrees Fahrenheit of warming cited by scientists and the media is described as not unprecedented and not cause for alarm due to ongoing fluctuations. The speaker argues that warming and CO2 emissions have not made natural disasters more frequent or violent, citing hurricane and wildfire data. They reference a graph from the Bulletin of the American Urological Society showing a slight downward trend in US hurricanes per year since 1900, and a North Atlantic hurricane intensity graph from 1920 to 2016 showing no trend. They claim the 2014 US National Climate Assessment presents an illusory upward trend by focusing on a red-highlighted portion. They also claim that US and global acres burned by wildfires have been decreasing since 1900. Regarding data reliability, the speaker highlights a gap between climate model predictions and observed data, noting that temperature measurements from weather balloons align with satellite data, while climate models over-predict warming. They discuss the urban heat island effect, giving Paris as an example where city temperatures are much higher than surrounding rural areas, suggesting data can be biased to frighten the public. The speaker argues CO2 is not the climate control knob, as it is only 0.04% of the atmosphere, and that historical CO2 levels have been far higher than today. They cite MIT oceanographer Carl Wunsch (spelled as Karl Wench) to claim that when oceans warm, more CO2 is released, and when oceans are cold, CO2 is absorbed. A graph is described showing CO2 rising centuries after temperature increases, implying temperature drives CO2 more than the reverse. They acknowledge CO2 may have some small influence but emphasize many other factors—volcanic activity, cosmic rays, and the sun—and claim limiting CO2 would largely stunt biodiversity with little effect on temperature. The speaker argues CO2 is essential for photosynthesis and that farmers use high CO2 in greenhouses to boost crop yields, illustrating CO2 as a life-giving gas and stating it would green the planet and increase food supply if CO2 increases. They conclude that climate change is an existential threat in Western discourse but offer this as historical context from Aztecs to the Salem witch trials. They mention carbon taxes and individual CO2 budgets as signs of climate issues infiltrating daily life and frame their conclusion as pursuing truth by examining data themselves. In summary, the speaker presents historical temperature variability, critiques of data and models, downplays CO2’s role, highlights CO2’s benefits to plant growth, and asserts that the climate crisis is a hoax to be opposed by scrutinizing data personally.

The speaker challenges the idea of man-made global warming, stating that the science behind it is weak and uncertain. They argue that the Earth's climate has always changed throughout history, without any help from humans. They mention the Little Ice Age in the 14th century, when the Thames River froze over and ice fairs were held. They also discuss the Medieval Warm Period, a time of prosperity and vineyards in Europe. Going further back, they mention the Holocene maximum during the Bronze Age, when temperatures were significantly higher for over 3 millennia. The speaker concludes that climate variation in the past is natural.

200 years ago, the temperature was only 1.5 degrees Celsius cooler than now, so claiming a 1.5-degree increase will be catastrophic is ridiculous. In the past, temperatures were much higher, yet CO2 levels were decreasing. There is no clear relationship between temperature and CO2 levels based on historical data.

Speaker 0: We have been cooling down for the last four thousand years. If we look at the last thirty eight years, there has been no change in temperature. In the last hundred and fifty years, we've had three warming periods and three cooling periods with a total warmth of about point six degrees Celsius. 1850, what happened then? Oh, yes. That was the end of the Little Ice Age. Do you think it's gonna warm or cool after Little Ice Age? Of course, it's gonna warm. So if you start taking measurements from 1850 in the industrial revolution, we have been warming. If you take measurements from the medieval warming, we've been cool. We've cooled about five degrees since then. If you take measurements from the Roman warming, we've cooled about five degrees. So as soon as someone tells you, oh, it's warming, the reply you give is since when?

The speaker, Professor Ian Clark, is a paleoclimatologist who studies Earth's temperatures in the Arctic over hundreds of thousands of years. He explains that ice cores contain data on climate variations and CO2 levels. Surprisingly, the research shows that temperature changes precede CO2 changes by about 800 years. This suggests that temperature drives CO2 levels, not the other way around. Multiple studies confirm this pattern, contradicting the belief that CO2 is the cause of global warming. The evidence from ice core drilling disproves the fundamental hypothesis of human-induced climate change.

For the past 10,000 years, it has been warmer than today for about 95% of the time. Throughout the Earth's history of 4.65 billion years, there has been substantial ice on the planet for only about 5-10% of that time. Currently, we have low levels of CO2 compared to Earth's history. The carbon dioxide in the room is around 900, but there is nothing bad about it. In fact, the more carbon dioxide, the better.

In this video, the speakers discuss historical climate changes to provide context for the current climate debate. They mention Jean Jouzel, a well-known climatologist and geologist in France, who studied the ice in Greenland and found that there were significant temperature variations of up to 16 degrees Celsius during the last deglaciation around 10,000 years ago. They argue that the small temperature changes we are experiencing today are insignificant compared to past variations. They also mention periods of significant warming in the past, where temperatures increased by about 10 degrees Celsius, leading to changes in vegetation and the appearance of pre-agricultural societies. They conclude by referring to the current period, known as the Holocene, which has been relatively stable for the past 12,000 years.

Ice from the Viking Age, around the year 1000, indicates that Greenland was about 1.5 degrees warmer than today. The Nordgrip project is drilling through the ice sheet to gather a 3-kilometer ice core, which holds climate data spanning over 120,000 years. By inserting a thermometer into the drilled hole, researchers can accurately map historical temperatures, reconstructing the last 10,000 years. Temperature data shows that around 4,000 years ago, it was 2.5 degrees warmer than now, followed by a gradual decline until the medieval warm period a thousand years ago. Other core samples confirm the end of the Little Ice Age about 140 years ago. While there has been a global temperature increase in the 20th century, determining whether this rise is man-made or a natural variation is challenging, as observations began at the coldest point in the last 10,000 years.

The Greenland ice core project, Nordgrip, is reopening to extract the last few meters of ice, which holds crucial climate data spanning over 120,000 years. By drilling the ice core and measuring temperatures with precision, scientists have reconstructed temperature changes over the past 10,000 years. The graph shows that around 4,000 years ago, temperatures were 2.5 degrees warmer than today, but gradually decreased until the Roman age. During the medieval warm period, temperatures reached a peak before declining to the lowest point in the last 8,000 years around 1875 AD. This coincides with the start of meteorological observations. Similar warm and cold periods have been confirmed in other parts of the Northern Hemisphere through carbon dating and measurements. However, it is challenging to determine if the 20th-century temperature increase was due to human activity or natural variation.

The transcript claims a classified CIA document titled *National Cultural Development Under Communism* (first published June 1957, immediately classified, approved for release 08/24/1999) explicitly mentions “Tartaria,” and uses the document to argue that Soviet communist authorities interfered with Muslim and minority cultural life, including through suppression of religion, confiscation of mosques and literature, and rewriting history. The document is presented as beginning with a Bolshevik proclamation dated 12/07/1917 promising Muslims of Russia—Tatars, Tatars and related groups in Volga, Crimea, Siberia, Turkestan, Transcaucasia, Chechens, mountain peoples, and those whose mosques and prayer houses were destroyed—that beliefs and customs and national and cultural institutions would be “forever free and inviolate,” and that they should organize national life in complete freedom. The transcript states Lenin and Stalin promised equality, sovereignty, self-determination (including secession), abolition of national and national religious privileges, and freedom of development for national minorities and ethnographic groups, followed by Soviet suppression contradicting those promises. The transcript then details a sequence of repressive measures attributed to communists in the Muslim regions of Russia: confiscation of mosque lands (1918); outlawing Muslim religious brotherhoods (1921–1922); ridicule of Islam and undermining spiritual leaders; making Islamic religious life “virtually impossible” (1929); elimination of Islamic leadership via arrest and deportation (and “liquidation”); closing nearly all village and most city mosques; suppressing religious literature through alphabet changes, confiscation of religious texts including the Quran, and suppression of religious publications; dismissal of pious practicing Muslims from responsible positions. It cites a decline in the number of mosques admitted by Soviet authorities: from 7,000 mosques in European Russia alone at the time of 1917, to 1,312 mosques in the whole Soviet Union by 1942, with examples including Tashkent (from 300 to 20), Samarkand (from over 100 to 17, with only one usable), Bukhara (from 360 to one), and Al Maratha (no mosques remaining). It also states communist authorities condemned publication of Muslim literary works except those extolling Russian and Russians. The transcript returns to cultural heritage, arguing that communist interference extended to history. It describes a specific directive dated 08/09/1944 by the Central Committee of the Communist Party, instructing the Tatar provincial committee to conduct a “scientific revision” of Tartaria/Tatar history to eliminate “shortcomings and mistakes” of a nationalistic character by writers and historians, in order to remove references to “great Russian aggressions” and hide the “real course” of Tatar-Russian relations. It further claims historians in Muslim areas of the USSR rewrote history at party orders to portray Russians favorably, and that truthful histories were withdrawn and destroyed to deny Muslims and Tatars access to genuine accounts of the past. The transcript emphasizes that the CIA document’s inclusion of “Tartaria” in the 1950s is presented as important. In addition to the CIA-document discussion, the transcript shifts to historical geography research using early modern books and maps. It describes a “compendium of geography” released in 1691 by Lawrence Ecard and an additional world description (1715) with similar geography, suggesting they copied from shared sources while showing minor coordinate differences. The transcript quotes from the 1690/1691 geography text portraying “Tartary” as the “greatest country in the world,” lying east of Russia and north of Persia, India, and China, bounded by longitudes 83rd to 180th degree and latitudes 39th to 72nd degree, with an asserted length of about 4,000 miles and breadth about 2,000 miles. It states Tartary had ancient provinces (Scythia, Sake, Sogdania, and part of Cimatia Asiatica, plus some Old Persia) and had remained unconquered until “Anno eleven sixty two,” when the Tatars and “obscure people” overran it and elected a monarchy, with “a good part” later “fallen away.” The transcript discusses claims that Tartary is related to Mongol rule and uses the name “great sham of Tartary” as associated with China, asserting the emperor is “also the famous country of China.” It further claims that “Shambalu” (presented as the imperial seat) is not Peking/Beijing, proposing that commonly asserted identifications are mistaken. It argues using references to “Kambalu,” “Khanbaliq,” and “Kambaluk,” and compares placement with the Great Wall, claiming Kambalu is north of the Great Wall and that “Beijing/Peking” is south of it. To support its geographic argument, the transcript quotes from a printed book (1679) attributed to Tamerlane’s historian, describing a conflict involving Calyx and the city of Kambalu/Kambaluk/Kumbalu, and then describes an invasion of China beginning with references to “Liyotom and Pekin,” using repeated references to wall-crossing as evidence that “Kambalu” and “Pekin/Beijing” are presented as distinct. It maintains that if the same locations were involved, the narrative of crossing the wall and the sequence of revolt and conquest would not align. It then discusses plotting the claimed Tartary coordinates on maps and connects coordinate ranges to areas where Russian expansion and treaties (e.g., Treaty of Natchinsk) are said to have affected Tartaria’s location, arguing that exact location around the time of the document is “debatable.” The transcript develops further geographic assertions about “Cathay” versus “Manji,” stating that Cathay is north of the Great Wall and Manji is south of it. It references multiple maps (including those from 1689 and 1570) to claim “Cathay” corresponds to areas beyond the Great Wall and that Kambalu is located in Cathay. It describes river names and regions (including references to Obi and other rivers/lakes difficult to locate today), and it ties these claims to how Tamerlane is said to move to Cathay and then “jump the wall” into China. It then moves into “American Tartary” discussions. Using references from 1652 and other materials (including Uzziah Priest and later authors), it argues that some 17th–19th century sources used the phrase “American Tartary” (or “an American Tartary”) to describe areas in North America that resemble “Asiatic/Tartary.” It addresses claims that one map (1652) suggests Tartary-controlled North America by matching coloration but argues it does not indicate full continental control. The transcript then expands into multiple “lost city” and “gold” narratives (e.g., Quivera/Quivera stories tied to Coronado, and alleged connections to “King Tartarax”), also citing an 1851/1830s style literature tradition that portrays indigenous peoples as having Tatar/Scythian origins or characteristics. The transcript repeatedly states that learned people in the 1700s–1800s believed connections between Tatars/Scythians and indigenous North American peoples, tying this to Bering Strait crossing theories and various scholarly arguments. Later, the transcript returns to Greenland and ice. It begins with claims that satellite imagery appears to show Greenland as “completely” covered in ice, and discusses an asserted ice-free history: it states beryllium-10/aluminum-26 dating suggests Greenland bedrock was exposed for more than 280,000 years until about 1,100,000 years ago, and it summarizes claims of long-term ice-sheet coverage “for the last eighteen million years,” with periods of reduction. It argues that if Greenland’s ice disappeared, it would most likely appear as an archipelago due to bedrock depression under ice weight. The transcript connects this to references in older literature (e.g., Burton’s *Anatomy of Melancholy*) describing Greenland as frozen for “half the year,” and it discusses old maps showing possible passages or canals through Greenland. It claims forums and maps (including ones from 1747/1592 and later) suggest a central passage “formerly passable” but later choked with ice. It mentions a 1888 expedition by Friedrich Nansen and notes that Nansen’s planned route aligned with the location of the alleged canal. The transcript concludes by stating that its Greenland and canal information is attributed to external forums, and frames the central question as whether there could have been ancient ruins or a once-passable Greenland corridor, then transitions back to broader Tartaria/indigenous-origin discussions and ends.

Geologists have been studying climate for 250 years, while climate science is a relatively new field. The speaker criticizes climate scientists as obscure and unemployable academics who cost taxpayers a lot of money. They argue that climate models are often incorrect and should be disregarded. The speaker points out that Earth has experienced six ice ages, with periods of glaciation and interglacial periods. They emphasize that we are currently in an interglacial period, which started 34 million years ago, and that temperatures have been both warmer and cooler in the past. The speaker also mentions that we have just come out of a little ice age and that temperatures have been rising since then. They dismiss the significance of carbon dioxide emissions, stating that the current level of 0.04% is low compared to geological history and that reducing it would harm plant and animal life.

My climate crusade has been the most successful of all my crusades. Many geologists support it because they understand geological and climate history. Today's climate is not extreme or new, with minor fluctuations and moderate temperatures. Even if it warms up, we may benefit.

This video discusses the Greenland ice core project, which has provided valuable data on the climate history of the region. By drilling through the ice sheet and analyzing the temperature variations, scientists have reconstructed temperatures from the past 10,000 years. The findings show that around 4,000 years ago, temperatures were 2.5 degrees warmer than today. The temperatures then gradually decreased until the Roman age, after which they increased again during the medieval warm period. The lowest point in the last 10,000 years occurred around 1650 AD. The Little Ice Age ended about 140 years ago, and various sources, including carbon dating and cave measurements, confirm the pattern of alternating warm and cold periods. The video concludes by highlighting the challenge of determining whether the temperature increase in the 20th century is due to natural variation or human influence.

Over the past 4000 years, the planet has been cooling down. In the last 38 years, there has been no change in temperature. In the last 150 years, there have been 3 warming periods and 3 cooling periods, resulting in a total warmth of about 0.6 degrees Celsius. The warming after the little ice age in 1850 is expected, and if measurements are taken from that time, we have been warming. However, if measurements are taken from the medieval warming or the Roman warming, we have actually been cooling by about 5 degrees. So, when someone says it's warming, the question to ask is, since when?

The era of global warming has ended; the era of global boiling has arrived, with claims of a sixth mass extinction. This video addresses climate change myths, starting with the claim that the Arctic will soon be ice-free. While some scientists predicted an ice-free Arctic by 2030 and the Greenland ice sheet melting could raise sea levels by 22 feet, others argue that Arctic sea ice has stabilized in recent years and returns in winter. Land ice in the Arctic shows minimal decline. Another myth is that polar bears are going extinct. Data indicates their populations have increased, contrary to environmental groups' claims. The third myth addressed is that climate change will create massive global food shortages. Agricultural output is at record highs, and increased carbon dioxide can benefit plant growth. NASA data shows the Earth has significantly greened. While the UN warned of a climate crisis famine in Madagascar, the issues are mostly due to bad governance, not climate change. Despite media claims linking climate change to food shortages and rising prices, global coffee production has increased since the 1990s. The next video will cover myths about infernos and more.

Speaker 0: The first ice core survey at Vostok in the Antarctic found a clear correlation between carbon dioxide and temperature. Speaker 1: Going back six hundred fifty thousand years, the temperature history shows that the relationship is complex, but there is one relationship far more powerful: when there is more carbon dioxide, the temperature gets warmer. Al Gore says the relationship between temperature and CO2 is complicated, but there was something important in the ice core data he failed to mention. Professor Ian Clark notes that the link between CO2 and temperature exists, but the link is the wrong way round. Speaker 2: When examining ice cores, climate on long scales is recorded in geological material. Ice samples use isotopes to reconstruct temperature; the atmosphere imprisoned in ice is liberated to analyze CO2 content. Speaker 0: Professor Clark and others have discovered a link between CO2 and temperature, but the link is reversed. Speaker 2: In the Vostok ice core, as temperature rises from early to later times during a deglaciation, CO2 follows with an eight-hundred-year lag, meaning temperature leads CO2 by about eight hundred years. Speaker 0: Major ice core surveys consistently show that temperature rises or falls, and then after a few hundred years, CO2 follows. Speaker 3: Therefore, carbon dioxide is not the cause of warming; warming produced the increase in CO2. Speaker 2: CO2 clearly cannot be causing temperature changes; it is a product of temperature changes. Speaker 4: The ice core record challenges the fundamental assumption of the theory that CO2 increases in the atmosphere cause warming, showing that the assumption is wrong. Speaker 0: How can higher temperatures lead to more CO2 in the atmosphere? Carbon dioxide is a natural gas produced by all living things. Speaker 5: Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant; living things grow with CO2. Humans produce only a small fraction of atmospheric CO2, in the single digits percentage wise. Speaker 0: Volcanoes produce more CO2 each year than all human sources combined. Animals and bacteria produce about 150 gigatons of CO2 per year, compared with 6.5 gigatons from humans. Dying vegetation, such as falling leaves, is another large source. The biggest source is the oceans. Speaker 6: The ocean is the major reservoir into which CO2 goes when it comes from the atmosphere, or from which it is re-emitted. Heating the surface makes the ocean emit CO2; cooling allows the ocean to dissolve more CO2. Speaker 0: The warmer the oceans, the more CO2 they produce; the cooler they are, the more they absorb. There is a time lag of hundreds of years between temperature change and CO2 change due to the ocean’s huge size and depth, giving the oceans a memory of temperature changes. Speaker 6: The ocean’s memory can extend up to ten thousand years. A current North Atlantic change may reflect events in distant parts of the ocean decades or centuries earlier. Speaker 0: The modern warming began long before widespread use of cars or electric lights. In the past 150 years, temperature rose just over half a degree Celsius, but most of that rise occurred before 1940. Since then, temperature has fallen for four decades and risen for three. There is no evidence from Earth’s long climate history that CO2 has ever determined global temperatures.

Glacial ice studies are often used to support the theory of human-induced global warming. These ice cores contain data that goes back hundreds of thousands of years. By analyzing the ice, scientists can determine past temperatures and the CO2 levels trapped within. Professor Clark and other researchers have found a correlation between CO2 variation and air temperature, but not in the expected way. The temperature changes occur first, followed by CO2 changes with an 800-year delay. This suggests that temperature leads CO2 changes, rather than the other way around. Multiple studies have shown this pattern, contradicting the hypothesis that CO2 is the primary cause of climate change. Ice core drilling provides evidence that challenges the fundamental assumption of human-induced climate change.

Over the past 4000 years, the planet has been cooling down. In the last 38 years, there has been no change in temperature. In the last 150 years, there have been 3 warming periods and 3 cooling periods, resulting in a total warmth of about 0.6 degrees Celsius. The warming after the Little Ice Age in 1850 was expected, and since then, we have been warming. However, if we consider measurements from the medieval and Roman warmings, we have actually cooled about 5 degrees. So, when someone claims it's warming, the question to ask is, "since when?"

People shouldn't panic about global warming because current changes are normal based on Earth's natural history. Over the last 10,000 years, temperatures have fluctuated by about one degree at the Equator and two degrees at the poles every thousand years. The current rate of rise is about one degree per century, which is not unusual. The IPCC's models are flawed because they assume no natural change. The greenhouse effect is small compared to other atmospheric factors like solar radiation and gravity, with oceans and clouds primarily controlling climate stability. The pre-industrialization period used as a baseline by the IPCC was the lowest point in the last ten thousand years. It is currently one degree above that low but two degrees cooler than the warmest period in the last eight to ten thousand years. During the last interglacial period, it was six degrees warmer, and hippos and elephants lived in England.

A 1.5 degrees Celsius increase in global atmospheric temperature is not a disaster. It's less than the temperature difference between breakfast and lunch and will open up vast areas of farmland. During the Eocene thermal maximum, the temperature was at least 5 to 7 degrees Celsius warmer than now, maybe even more. At the same time, CO2 was going in the exact opposite direction of the temperature. There is no clear relationship between CO2 and temperature.

Twenty years after Al Gore warned of imminent polar melt, the transcript argues that Antarctic sea ice extent is now greater than it was when that claim was made, with satellite records dating back to 1979 showing long periods of stability and even overall expansion. The same pattern is reported in Antarctic wildlife: Gentoo penguins have expanded their range and increased in number, and Adelie penguins also demonstrate long-term population growth. On a global scale, the text asserts that extinction rates are far lower today than a century ago, citing a recent biodiversity study that attributes most species losses to hunting, habitat destruction, and invasive species in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, rather than climate change. The narrative further points to temperature data that allegedly contradicts alarming climate claims: in December 2025, Antarctica was colder than average, and more recently, on January 15, 2026, Concordia Station recorded a low of minus 43.4°C, described as an exceptionally frigid midsummer value for the Antarctic Plateau. The speaker contends that the Doomsday Brigade was wrong in its predictions, asserting there is zero accountability for those forecasts. The overall message contrasts alarmist climate narratives with what the speaker characterizes as evidence of stability or even improvement in Antarctic ice, wildlife populations, and broader extinction trends, while noting unusually cold conditions in specific recent measurements.

For the past 4000 years, the planet has been cooling. In the last 38 years, there has been no temperature change. Over the last 150 years, there have been 3 warming periods and 3 cooling periods, with a total warmth increase of 0.6 degrees Celsius. The end of the Little Ice Age in 1850 marked the start of warming. Since then, we have warmed due to the Industrial Revolution. If we measure from the medieval and Roman warmings, we have actually cooled by about 5 degrees each. So, when someone says it's warming, ask them since when?