By observing several indicators, a team of researchers from Oregon State University’s College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences concluded that in as few as 87 years from now, temperatures are expected to be bigger than anytime in the existence of the human species.


Paleoclimatic research is providing a more detailed look on how the planet’s average surface temperature fluctuated over the Holocene – the current geological era we are in that began ~12.000 years ago. This is practically the time in which the human species really evolved as a civilization, making its mark on the planet, abandoning the hunter-gatherer traditions to settle down into an agricultural, settlement focused lifestyle.

They used indirect markers, like pollen and shells from marine organisms to chart long time warming and cooling trends. They concluded that the hottest period was during the start of the Holocene, with temperatures in the past decade going close to those numbers, but not quite reaching them – that however, will soon change.

“By the year 2100, we will be beyond anything human society has ever experienced,” said study leader Shaun Marcott, a postdoctoral researcher at Oregon State University’s College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences.

According to NASA, the average global temperature for 2012 was 14.61 degrees Celsius (58.3 degrees Fahrenheit); even an increase of a single degree can have catastrophic consequences – bare in mind, this is the average temperature for the entire year for the entire globe. Basically, every 1.8-degree Fahrenheit increase brings with it a (roughly) 20 meter increase in sea levels – but that’s really the least of the problems. In the past century, temperatures have risen by 1.3 degrees, and the trend is accelerating

ALSO READ  "Shell knew." The big oil company was aware of the effects of climate change since at least 1991

global warming

This research, which was published in Science, was not the first one to reach this kind of conclusion using such proxies, but it is first to pull together so many of them from all over the world, clearly indicating the rate and magnitude of global warming:


“We know that there were periods in the past that were warmer than today — for example, the Cretaceous period 100 million years ago,”  said Michael Mann, a physicist and climatologist at Pennsylvania State University. “The real issue is the rate of change, because that’s what challenges our adaptive capacity.”

Like us on Facebook
Enjoyed this story? Join the newsletter and stay relevant in today's rapidly evolving world.
ZME Science newsletter
Blasts off every weekday to more than 35,000 subscribers.


  1. 1

    Climate science is based on the assumption that you can algebraically add two discrete radiation fluxes and use that sum to calculate a temperature using the Stefan-Boltzmann equation.

    Universities teach this as the basis fro the greenhouse effect. The University of Washington has a lecture on the web where they teach that 239.7 Solar radiation combines with 239.7 “back radiation” from greenhouse gases to give a total of 479.4 with a corresponding temperature of about 303 Kelvin.

    I do not believe this ever happens.

    I simply ask you to consider this.

    I have a thermometer and it reads 18 degrees C or about 291 Kelvin which is the ambient air temperature.

    I use a 150 Watt spotlight to heat it to 36 degrees C or 309 Kelvin.

    The Stefan-Boltzmann equation says at 18 C or 291 K the thermometer emits about 407 Watts per square metre – assume emissivity is 1 – Climate Scientists do.

    The Stefan-Boltzmann equation says at 36 C or 309 K the thermometer emits about 517 Watts per square metre.

    How do you account for that extra 110 Watts per square metre the thermometer emits at 36 C ?

    It cannot be the spotlight which is a mere 45 cm from the thermometer is emitting only 110 Watts per square metre – 110 Watts per square metre corresponds to a Stefan-Boltzmann calculated temperature of about 210 Kelvin or minus 73 degrees C.

    If I were to try to heat the thermometer by say putting it in a water bath the temperature would have to be at least 36 C – how can it be valid to argue radiation from an object at minus 73 degrees C can heat the thermometer to 36 degrees C – that is nonsense !

    Therefore Climate Science must be wrong to claim the simple algebraic sum is the right answer.

    If you use the University model the total of 517 is 407 from the air and 110 from the spotlight – that is nonsense.

    I took it one step further and introduced a second spotlight that heated to 30 C.

    The result of both was 46 C.

    Climate Science teaches the answer is 478 for 30 C or 303 K plus 517 for 36 C or 309 K giving a total of 995 with a Stefan-Boltzmann calculated temperature of 364 K or 91 degrees C.

    That is nonsense !

    The real result is 478 for 30 C or 303 K minus 407 air = 71 – plus

    517 for 36 C or 309 K minus 407 air = 110 – plus

    407 for air at 18 C or 291 K
    equals a total of 588 with a Stefan-Boltzmann calculated temperature of
    about 319 Kelvin or 46 degrees C.
    Climate Science is based on a simple error in the correct manner in which the sum of radiative forcings sum !
    If it is wrong at this basic level the rest of it must be highly dubious !

  2. 2

    Your graph ends in 1850 (150 years BP – which in this case was 2000) BEFORE the current warming which has raised global temperatures above the peak of the Holocene Thermal Optimum.
    Do you think we are all that stupid.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>