Skip to main content

New research shows the Arctic is practically baking under anthropogenic global warming, hottest in 120,000 years Comments

A new study reveals that temperatures across the Canadian Arctic are now greater than they have been in the last 44,000 years, and possibly longer. Scientists say it is more proof of anthropogenic global warming. Continue Reading

11 - 20 of 25 Comments

  1. J. Bob
    1 year ago

    It is a sad, that this site seems to go in for the youtube hype of a video, without at least doing some basic background checks as to basic accuracy.

    One could come to the conclusion, that this part at least, is nothing more then a activist section, that is more interested in words, then knowledge.

    Having been in science & engineering for 50+ years, including patents & papers, my regret is wasting my time reading reading this item, to put it mildly, propaganda. .

  2. Jerry N
    1 year ago

    Anna: "All this information tells us the composition of the atmosphere which strictly correlates to the temperature. "

    The "composition of the atmosphere" does not "strictly" correlate to temperature of the atmosphere. In fact, there is little or no correlation of the two. The molecular concentration of gases in the earth's atmosphere remains largely the same all over the earth, while the temperature widely varies. Atmospheric composition correlates to altitude, not temperature. One can fill an entire room with 100% gaseous Nitrogen and keep it at exactly the same temperature as normal air. What you wrote and what these supposed genius researchers concluded is psuedo-scientific gobbly-gook hogwash that has no basis in any science or reality.

  3. windy
    1 year ago

    There are already benefits to warming that get lost in all the fear mongering and we are due for a new glacial period based on the cyclical patterns of ice ages. 20,000 years ago the area of the Earth where I live, a major food source of USA cropland, was covered with 1 mile thick glaciers. I have yet to understand why the human race would be better off with another glacial period that would SIGNIFICANTLY reduce crop yields and animal grazing areas to a degree that food becomes scarce, as it does in every glacial episode. Given that such a scenario might leave enough food for 2 billion people at a time when the planet population is 10 billion or more, why are we panicking over a possible 2.0C degree increase in warming which would still be far cooler than when the Earth had a climate like Florida in the Arctic which account for the fossil remains of crocodile like creatures we find beneath the melting ice?

    The latest IPCC AR5 Summary Of Science is indicating that while warming is a fact, the possibility of nearer term tipping points are better known and in fact have been reduced. It is also undeniable that CO2 reduction will not stop current warming due to the longer residence time of CO2.

    To me the solution is to develop CO2 capture technology which would allow us to remove CO2 in the atmosphere immediately and CONTROL the level. If you really are concerned about future generations and not just using AGW for political purposes, humans need to learn to control the Earth rather than waste time and money on green pipedreams. We already have the technology to capture CO2 from the atmosphere thanks to labs at Princeton and JPL. One of these technologies also allows for the conversion of CO2 to gasoline. Think of it as being able to do what plants already due which is to convert CO2, plant food, into energy. God and nature have already shown us how to do this conversion, we have successfully copied God and nature and now all we need to do is develop large scale capabilities to control CO2 and find the ideal level for human existence.

  4. Otter
    1 year ago

    Let's see... the Eemian interglacial was 125,000 years ago.... and it was even warmer than we are now.

    In between, we've had 113,000 years of 1/3 of the NA continent being covered in a mile of ice.

    Since then, we've warmed up Almost As Much as the Eemian.

    Wow. Color me Unimpressed.

  5. Mark Goldes
    1 year ago

    All fossil fuels can be left behind much more rapidly than might be imagined.

    Revolutionary new technologies are en-route that can turn future cars into power plants, able to sell electricity when suitably parked. No wires needed. Cars, trucks and buses might even pay for themselves.

    These are hard to believe breakthroughs, THE LITTLE ENGINE THAT COOLS has been invented that needs no fuel. Once validated at an independent lab it could increase appreciation of other neglected but important new science.


    Since these engines will not get hot, small plastic desktop piston engines are planned that will run a tablet and recharge cell phones. They will demonstrate rather than argue that the world has changed.

    Metal versions are expected to power homes 24/7 and replace diesel generators. They will power emergency generators and an on-board recharge for some electric cars. Later replacing wind turbines of all sizes.

    THE LITTLE ENGINE THAT COOLS will open a practical path to rapid reduction in the need for fossil fuels.

  6. fireofenergy
    1 year ago

    Let not the truth of excess CO2 be used as an excuse to further the political ambitions of would be tyrants. First, they will tell you the truth (the CO2 is, indeed an infrared absorber and WILL overheat the biosphere as well as turn into carbonic acid upon contact with the oceans), then they will use these TRUTHS to tell a lie... that we must all use less energy.
    Actually, the solution is in developing the least expensive, most abundant source..

  7. Anna
    1 year ago

    Ice coring samples can be used to look at oxygen isotope compositions, isotope composition of O2 and N2, sodium ion concentrations, CO2 and methane levels, deuterium and C-14 concentrations in the ice bubbles present. All this information tells us the composition of the atmosphere which strictly correlates to the temperature. We can also look at things like bacteria and fungus present in each layer of the ice (called 'Stratigraphy')- this tells us even more about climate fluctuations as even the slightest temperature change affects species present. We can also take coring samples from lakes and streams to collect fossil data and pollen data (called phytoliths). No- obviously there were no prehistoric scientists feeding us information. All of this indirect information is called 'proxy data'- if multiple independent analyses of many many data sources come to the same conclusion it's irrational to deny what's sitting right in front of us.

    We honestly have no idea what climate change will mean for us. Maybe it will be just a nuisance or maybe the effects will be terrible. But it's already having an effect on people. We're insulated from it living in a 1st world country (Look at micronesia or first nations people in Canada for example). Simply- We don't know. That's why we're studying it.

    Lastly- federal funding for research generates a LOT of money. That means jobs. Profits. Scientific advancement. New technology. It makes me proud to be American- though there was more glory in our scientific innovation 50 years ago. It makes us competitive in the global economy. If that makes you feel better...

  8. Roger Bird
    1 year ago

    Warmer? Fact. Anthropogenic? Unproven assertion.

  9. Peter Anderson
    1 year ago

    So, Mr Connolly, how is it you think that being warmer now than within that period leading into and then including of the previous Ice Age is showing (some how) anthropogenic warming? There is observably no 'climate change' problem. These 'researchers' then should not only be defunded but asked for the return of such monies that they spent.
    From ( comes
    "Pachauri quietly blows goalposts away, pretends to like skeptics. It’s all PR to keep the gravy train running."
    Then, from (
    "Charles Sturt’s time: so hot that thermometers exploded. Was Australia’s hottest day in 1828? 53.9C!"
    Of interest is ( and then
    "Map: The Climate Change Scare Machine — the perpetual self-feeding cycle of alarm"
    It would not take too much effort, Mr Connolly, to do some basic fact checking BEFORE you place such nonsense (which you persistently do) on this web-site. You obviously need a stricter editor overseeing your writings. The search ( brings forth
    "Melting glacier in Alaska reveals ancient remains of forest – evidence of warm periods"
    "Washington Times: Climate due to water cycle not carbon dioxide"
    "Cook’s fallacy “97% consensus” study is a marketing ploy some journalists will fall for"
    Then do notice "Weekly Area of Snow Extent"
    From ( comes
    "Newsbytes: Polar Bear Population Growing Despite Declining Sea Ice"
    "Fat polar bears (Ursus Maritimus Obesus) -vs- CFACT"
    "NPR finally gets it – does this signal an end to the polar bear as poster bear for global warming?"
    So with the Polar Bear obviously not in danger, why are these researchers looking elsewhere rather than at the Ice itself? Well, ( there seems to be not real, observable problem within the Ice either and still no anthropogenic effect...just natural variability. Are you employed to write the nonsense you do Mr Connolly?

  10. Jerry N
    1 year ago

    "...the results show that temperatures in the Canadian Arctic have reached their highest point in 120 millennia. "

    Complete and utter academic hogwash. Who was it that measured the temperatures in the Canadian Arctic "120 millennia[sic]" ago? And where exactly did these genius researchers find that ancient data and check the calibration of the measurement instruments used by those brilliant ancient scientists who were obviously WAYYYYYY ahead of their time?

    The only thing that's at its highest peak nowadays is the amount of money the US government flushes down the toilet by funding this nonsense.

Leave a Comment

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment

Newsletter Sign Up

Saint of the Day

March 5 Saint of the Day

St. John Joseph of the Cross
March 5: St. John Joseph of the Cross was born about the middle of ... Read More