Not ignored but omitted by the popular science public facing articles. Just like monitory supply, the rate is important. The earth has been hotter and colder in the past but the rate of change was often much slower (geologic time scale) not generational. Also, changes in the past were due to natural causes (volcanic activity, plate tectonics, impacts, solar cycles, etc.). These are either a one off or cyclical. These process still occur but now we have a new fuel source, human activity. And as of the Industrial Revolution there has been no cyclical nature or one off. The fuel is up and to the right at a fast rate of speed, just like money supply. There is now less wiggle room for natural phenomena. Not saying we all need to drive electric, eat bugs, or other stuff (I don’t) but this is where the original concern in the scientific community started before governments twisted the narrative for political control.
One of the things I almost never see mentioned in the various climate debates is the observation that Earth is historically on the cooler side and is rising from that very low base.
The planet has historically gone through multiple cycles of not having polar ice caps and then having them again, etc. Over millions of years. There's been a really long-term feedback loop there.
I'm not a climate scientist by any stretch, but I just find that general omission in public discussions around it to be interesting.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/whats-hottest-earths-ever-been
Discussion
No replies yet.