<p>I suspect what that person is saying is that they think global warming is not actually occurring - that any changes are (like the Medieval Warm Period) naturally occurring and that it won't play out differently over time. But it is easy to show that the warming now is of a different scale than that example -</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/En6KT.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/En6KT.jpg" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-05T03:20:48.953Z
And when they point out how much colder it was at the beginning of the chart, remind them that there were glaciers covering New York at that time, so if that much colder than normal equals glaciers over New York, what does the same amount warmer than normal look like?
John
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-01-25T16:55:11.383Z
can you explain what is being shown on the x-axis please? i assume that the x-axis is in units of years. and 0 refers to some time epoch... 2022, 2021, 2010? what year is 0 referring to?
Trevor Boyd Smith
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-01-25T22:48:12.180Z
@TrevorBoydSmith - The graph was chosen for including multiple data sources, that don't show any exceptional MWP comparable to current warming. I think it has 1950 as the zero (BP) point. From "Holocene global mean surface temperature, a multi-method reconstruction approach" - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0530-7
Ken Fabian
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-05T02:59:13.677Z
2022-07-05T02:59:13.677Z
Ken Fabian
<p>If the question is a bit confusing, what I'm asking is if there is scientific evidence to counter an argument against climate change that I had come across.</p>
<p>The person said that climate change is not a serious issue due to the &quot;globe&quot; having warmed up before in humanity's existence -- specifically <a href="https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2019/02/study-shows-that-vikings-enjoyed-a-warm-greenland/#:%7E:text=After%20reconstructing%20southern%20Greenland%27s%20climate,the%20previous%20and%20following%20centuries." rel="nofollow noreferrer">Greenland during the Viking age</a>, or the Nordic countries.</p>
<p>Addendum:  I understand that such an argument against climate change is not factually correct, however, in the spirit of the scientific method I went to look for evidence that pointed either in favor or against this argument... only to then wade through a quagmire of pseudo science and nonsensical claims in favor of this response which are distressingly common.  Thus I ask this question to try to get more clear information.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-04T09:12:13.470Z
Are you aware of the website https://skepticalscience.com/?  It counters many denialist arguments.  You may find an answer there.
gerrit
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-04T12:40:42.887Z
Please ask one question per Stack Exchange question :)  They're quite different questions for people to answer
JeopardyTempest
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-04T13:28:33.410Z
Unfortunately, many of the arguments on skepticalscience.com are themselves refutable and sometimes accurate, misleading, or given with poorly-sourced information.
Barry Carter
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-04T16:26:02.233Z
@blacksmith37, could please elaborate on the how this question is politically incorrect?
Seraphim
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-05T02:59:33.023Z
facts does not work on climate deniers so it might be better to focus your energy in a different direction.
trond hansen
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-05T03:11:50.457Z
@trondhansen True enough, and the conversation did go a different direction.  It's just my curiosity started to get bit out hand so I started looking around.
Seraphim
<climate-change><earth-history><climate-data>
Countering climate change skeptics that point to previous warming episodes
Seraphim
# Countering climate change skeptics that point to previous warming episodes

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-07-04)

If the question is a bit confusing, what I'm asking is if there is scientific evidence to counter an argument against climate change that I had come across.

The person said that climate change is not a serious issue due to the "globe" having warmed up before in humanity's existence -- specifically [Greenland during the Viking age](https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2019/02/study-shows-that-vikings-enjoyed-a-warm-greenland/#:%7E:text=After%20reconstructing%20southern%20Greenland%27s%20climate,the%20previous%20and%20following%20centuries.), or the Nordic countries.

Addendum: I understand that such an argument against climate change is not factually correct, however, in the spirit of the scientific method I went to look for evidence that pointed either in favor or against this argument... only to then wade through a quagmire of pseudo science and nonsensical claims in favor of this response which are distressingly common. Thus I ask this question to try to get more clear information.

**Tags:** climate-change, earth-history, climate-data

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Are you aware of the website https://skepticalscience.com/?  It counters many denialist arguments.  You may find an answer there.  
> **username_2**: Please ask one question per Stack Exchange question :)  They're quite different questions for people to answer  
> **username_3**: Unfortunately, many of the arguments on skepticalscience.com are themselves refutable and sometimes accurate, misleading, or given with poorly-sourced information.  
> **username_0**: @blacksmith37, could please elaborate on the how this question is politically incorrect?  
> **username_4**: facts does not work on climate deniers so it might be better to focus your energy in a different direction.  
> **username_0**: @username_4 True enough, and the conversation did go a different direction.  It's just my curiosity started to get bit out hand so I started looking around.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_5 on 2022-07-05. Score: 4

I suspect what that person is saying is that they think global warming is not actually occurring - that any changes are (like the Medieval Warm Period) naturally occurring and that it won't play out differently over time. But it is easy to show that the warming now is of a different scale than that example -

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/En6KT.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/En6KT.jpg)

> **Comments:**
> **username_6**: And when they point out how much colder it was at the beginning of the chart, remind them that there were glaciers covering New York at that time, so if that much colder than normal equals glaciers over New York, what does the same amount warmer than normal look like?  
> **username_7**: can you explain what is being shown on the x-axis please? i assume that the x-axis is in units of years. and 0 refers to some time epoch... 2022, 2021, 2010? what year is 0 referring to?  
> **username_5**: @username_7 - The graph was chosen for including multiple data sources, that don't show any exceptional MWP comparable to current warming. I think it has 1950 as the zero (BP) point. From "Holocene global mean surface temperature, a multi-method reconstruction approach" - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0530-7  

---

