Global Warmists Angry Half The Earth Isn’t Covered In Ice

ice age earthA newly published study indicates human-caused global warming starting shortly after the Industrial Revolution may have helped the Earth narrowly avert a catastrophic ice age, and global warming advocates and their mainstream media allies are very angry about it. Yes, really.

For the past 3 million years, the Earth has undergone a regular cycle of long ice age glaciations occasionally interrupted by short warm periods. The glaciations last approximately 100,000 years and the warm periods last an average of only 10,000 years. Our present warm period has been in existence for 10,000 years, leading many scientists to worry that a new ice age glaciation may be imminent.

A study in the science journal Nature examined the natural cycles that cause the cyclical glaciations and warm periods and concluded that by the 1800s—after 500 years of cooling temperatures during the Little Ice Age—the conditions were at hand for the Earth to end its 10,000-year warm period and plunge into another full-blown glaciation.

During glaciations, ice sheets more than a mile deep cover much of Europe, Asia, and North America. The Nature study concluded human-caused global warming may have been the deciding factor preventing the plunge into another ice age. The study also noted that ongoing human-caused global warming may be preventing such a plunge even today.

We Want an Ice Age Now

The Christian Science Monitor published an article Thursday by correspondent Husna Haq claiming it is horrible news that the Earth is not plunging into another ice age glaciation.

“While it may appear to be good news that humans have successfully delayed the next ice age, it’s actually not,” wrote Haq. “Ice ages play a significant role in shaping the landscape and leaving behind fertile soil for Earth’s civilizations. They carve channels in Earth, leaving behind rivers and lakes.”

Got that? It is a horrible thing that thousands of feet of glacial ice do not cover New York, Chicago, London, Stockholm, St. Petersburg, Warsaw, and Berlin today because 100,000 years from now—when the glaciation would finally end—there would be pretty new lakes and rivers left behind, along with fertile soil for whatever species may or may not exist on Earth 100,000 years from now.

Population centers with tens of millions of people would be literally destroyed—including the eradication of the entire nations of Canada, Great Britain, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Ireland, and all of the Baltic nations—and billions of people would die of starvation as a result of related crop failures and other climate disasters. This is what global warming advocates and the mainstream media want to happen because it is better for billions of people to die a painful natural death than to live in the temperate world of today as a result of human-caused global warming.

Gadget Bloggers Are Now Earth Scientists

My favorite part of the Christian Science Monitor article is the claim that “If the period between ice ages becomes too long, the planet may become relatively dry and barren, explains Gizmodo.”

Who or what is a Gizmodo, you may ask? Gizmodo is, according to Wikipedia, a “design and technology blog” whose bloggers typically express opinions about iPhones, televisions, and other consumer electronics. Apparently, one of its bloggers responded to the news of the narrowly averted ice age by speculating that “Too much time without an ice age and Earth could become relatively barren and dry.”

Well, gosh darn it, if a blogger in the consumer electronics blogosphere speculated that this may be true, then it absolutely must be true and it is worthy of being reported as true in mainstream media publications like the Christian Science Monitor.

But let’s forget for the moment that bloggers on consumer electronics websites would seem to be questionable sources for scientific speculation about ice age climate conditions 100,000 years from now. Let’s pretend that Gizmodo is akin to the peer-reviewed science journal Geophysical Research Letters.

Does anybody really believe that a “relatively barren and dry” Canada, Northern Europe, and Northern United States 100,000 years from now is better than a Canada, Northern Europe, and Northern United States that are completely obliterated and absolutely devoid of life under mile-thick glaciers? Does anybody really believe that it is better for billions of people to die today under the assault of life-strangling polar ice caps than for people in a future temperate world to undergo relatively drier conditions? Global warming activists do. And their mainstream media allies do, too.

And alarmists wonder why nobody follows their advice.


Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (5)

  • Avatar

    David Lewis


    It seems that some are so insanely obsessed with their believe in man made warming that anything they believe it causes is bad. That is true even for the result of saving billions of human lives.

    Our current time shows the Earth’s average temperature has low sensitivity if it has any at all to the concentration of carbon dioxide. We are sitting at 400 ppm and have had no significant warming for 18 years. In the 1750 to 1850 time frame the carbon dioxide the concentrations were 280 to 290. We have to look else where as to why we didn’t enter an ice age. We probably were not headed there in the first place.

    I hope I’m right in thinking that we could head off a major ice age. Once a certain point is reach these are caused by a positive feed back loop. Ice reflects more heat back into space than the earth it covers. More ice means more heat is lost to space and the earth cools. This results in more ice. We should be able to break this loop by putting a very thin layer of soot on selected new areas of ice to melt it.

    Getting permission of COP 51 or another COP would be another matter. A large nation with better leadership than we have now would just have to go and do it.

  • Avatar



    Has anyone seen an analysis of what the earth would look like if it was 2 degrees warmer VS 2 degrees colder ?

    Humans are fairly adaptable but what happens to all plants /forests ,ocean ,lake and land creatures ? Are they better off or worse off ?
    What temperature change would be required to create the next ice age ?

    Shouldn’t we be pleased if the earth was actually warming ?

  • Avatar



    Do these people realize what would happen to crops, particularly in the Northern latitudes, if the planet were much colder? I wish someone would let us know what is the appropriate amount of ice and snow. We’re getting snow 9 months out of the year at times already in some states that grow crops. I don’t think 3 months is long enough for beans and corn to mature.

  • Avatar

    Charles Higley


    They are quite myopic and misleading to say that interglacials are 10,000 years and not mention that, without the Industrial Revolution, our current Interglacial is already 12,500 years, so we are overdue (and it’s not our fault) for a glacial period to start.

    Those with the guts to look at the big picture will see that the current Interglacial’s Holocene Optimum was indeed the warmest time and the succeeding Warm Periods have all been cooler than the last, The Egyptian, Minoan, Roman, Medieval, and Modern Warm Periods. Their peak warm temperatures and times create a clear downward trend. We do not know when we drop off the edge into a true glaciation.

    For these clowns to claim we have delayed anything is pure speculation and, in light of their hidden agenda, it is our propaganda, agitprop.

  • Avatar



    May I point out that we are still in the ” Last Ice Age ” ?

    There are still massive glaciers in both hemispheres that have been there for over 100,000 years.

    The glaciers were much larger 12000 and 30000 years ago, but they’re still there and that means Ice Age.

    Instead of calling the present an interglacial period, ” semi-glacial ” would be better.

Comments are closed

No Trackbacks.