Head to www.squarespace.com/drbenmiles to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code drbenmiles

I'm very surprised UKposts allowed an actual scientific discussion of a controversial topic. Well done, sir.

Glad you mentioned that we're STILL in an ice age and made the distinction between ice ages and glacial periods. So many people just skim that entirely.

Thank you for taking me back to my teenage years when scientists and researchers could have intellectual conversations with data and existing evidence.

Thank you for reminding people that we’re still in an ice age. I’ve been trying to explain this to people for over a decade.

Science has been so tied to politics people have all but forgotten what a real scientific demeanor is. A breath of fresh air.

I've personally felt as though winter has been taking longer to arrive, but staying for the same amount of time once it does. I remember back in the mid 90s that we would reliably get the first snow in late mid October, and we would get the first real storm in late November or early December. I also remember that in 1995, we got a blizzard in April that was considered unheard of. Now almost 30 years later we often don't get our first snow until January, but now it's not uncommon to have snow in may. Summer has also felt shifted. I remember as a kid June and July were swelteringly hot, whereas August and September had a break in the temperatures. Now June and July are temperate, August and September feel like an oven, and there isn't a break in the temperatures sometimes until early December. Just what I've personally observed, with all the pitfalls of memory and perception.

When I was in highschool in the 90's my teachers told me that we are in the tail end of an ice age and that in my lifetime I should expect an increase in temperature, sea rises and better farming

I was looking at the ice core temperature scale of the last 800,000 years a few years ago. Every temp spike they projected was followed fairly closely by a coresponding methane spike.

I like how he admits that we still don't know. A sign that he is really an expert in this subject matter.

Back in the early 90’s my Dad and his friend started using landfills to generate electricity. They had wells placed all over the landfill and burned the gas on two giant Caterpillar engines that powered a big generator. They sold the power to the City. The first one they did was in Burlington, Vermont. I remember my dad taking me there when I was a kid.

I've been living in the Midwest much longer than I care to say.... and winter is coming wayyyyyyyy later than it used to and its over wayyyyyyy earlier. This year winter that looked like winter, lasted about 6 days (mid/late January to end of January). Its February and we have "Spring" flowers coming up in our yards already, its going to be 72'F in a couple days. Its amazing how the locals ignore it. When it stops getting below freezing at all over winter here, things are really going to get freaky. But, somehow the human mind will find a way to dismiss it I'm sure.

The difficult part about having this kind of discussion is people automatically make it seem like you are in favor of polluting the world.

Great presentation of what's known and yet unknown. No political double-speak. I was starting to believe this was not possible in todays world. Thank you.

A breath of fresh air to have the climate debate presented with significant research and justification. Dr. Ben, you have brought together much of the various arguments into a concise summary of what we really need to track. I found the global methane release map extremely fascinating. Thank you. This deserves wide viewing.

My electronic principles lecture taught me this cyclic theory whilst learning satellite orbits and calculation position to signal strength.......that was early 90s and I've never heard of it discussed since....when ever I explain it to people I literally see there jaw drop....I worked for ESA on sat coms and literally nobody had heard of these cycles..... i will sendcthis video to people in future because I'm done explaining 😊

I noticed you make zero mention of the solar cycles which definitely must be part of the process in the warming/cooling of the earth. (How much radiation is even sent our way, BEFORE we're even talking about absorption/reflection)

I always try to tell people we are technically still in an ice age, we're just at the tail end of it that's why it's been so nice and livable for us

What a fantastic presentation. In this period, it is borderline miraculous to find a video on this particular subject that cares to give HISTORICAL CONTEXT. I am grateful.

A note to the animator: The elliptical orbit is centered at a focus, near the pointier end of the ellipse. Both the closest point, periapsis, and the furthest point, apoapsis, occur at the pointy ends of the ellipse, basically 180 degrees apart, not on the flat side of the ellipse 90 degrees apart. This is not responsible for our seasons but it is a seasonal effect. The southern hemisphere's seasons are somewhat amplified by getting closer to the sun in summer while the Northern hemisphere's seasons are somewhat moderated by getting closer to the sun in winter.

This doesn’t fit the narrative of WEF and the super elites. Thanks for taking the time and explaining this process.

I was the constructor of a methane recovery plant in 1986 there was three larger entities in charge like AdamOsgood mentioned. Sunshine City Council Victoria Australia, A consultants and the energy manufacturing equipment supplier GE i think .right from the start there wasn't enough gas to run 24 hours so the three entities decided to Sue each other in 6 months they had spent more in court costs than the energy plant could possibly produce ever

excellent vid, i love your explanation and i actually understood everything you said good job !!!!

Thank you for providing a fascinating, unbiased appraisal of the outline of what I saw as the carbon/ methane cycle. I have subscribed. Lat thing I rarely leave comments.

In Siberia massive frozen lakes are unfreezing and producing methane. Nova did a special about that. Permafrost is unfreezing around the world.

The Sub-Permafrost Methane Bubble is leaking now that permafrost is thawing

Really really enjoyed it, thank you. 4:32 I wanted to help with the space graphics. When Earth's eccentricity changes, *the longer axis increases* while the shorter axis decreases (or vice versa) -- rather than just one axis changing.

So: I’m not sure how your video found it’s way into my algorithm, but I’m glad it did. It’s informative, and not overly filled with jargon that will turn kids away! Thanks! Subscribing. 😊

It's so refreshing to hear well explained, well reasoned and insightful commentary. The subject is somewhat depressing but the video was spot on.

I'm an old retired undereducated woman with an interest in meteorology and natural sciences. This video popped up after a different (unrelated) video, so I watched it. I really, really enjoyed it. I've not encountered Dr. Ben Miles before, but I think I'm in love. Thank you!

So my understanding is that we are Terraforming Earth into a warmer plant supporting world. Methane seems to be an issue, but changing construction techniques when building these facilities to be inclusive for methane capture seems to be the most sensible path. We shouldn't try to compete with nature for carbon capture, current percentage of carbon in the atmosphere is 0.04%, at 0.02% plant life can't survive. So leave the carbon capture the methane. Methane Ice exist and can burn so potential fuel source there.

I remember evaluations of data that seemed to scare hell out of out of the public...then silence,with the voices silenced that warned people they didn't have a clue where this was going.I am pleased this is coming back,but its the type of info that'll will cause major disruptions when people start truly understand how massively this can/will disrupt modern societies. Hang on to your hat,this will be a one hellava ride

Enjoyed the content-refreshing to hear “we really don’t know” for a change.

Thank you for explaining this with actual science based on common sense and careful observation.

It's extremely weird how this video seems to attract people who can't be bothered to watch it from start to finish (or maybe don't have the mental faculty to actually understand its chain of reasoning), but just assume that it agrees with their preconceived notion that human activity has nothing to do with this. Even though it clearly argues that yes, as always, increased temperature and CO2 is the driver of this rapid and not naturally expected increase in methane emissions. Just because it's presented in a "calm", matter-of-factly manner, and doesn't go out of its way to keep reiterating that humans are to blame, people just skip the content and go along with their feeling and assume that it argues the opposite. Ironically, this can lead to the conclusion that you _do_ have to hold people by their hand, and keep hammering in the basics, to prevent people's brains from injecting their own politics that prevents them from understanding your argument... But then they'll accuse you of making it political. Man, I'm glad I'm not a science communicator.

I'm from the 60s, and it was how you read 📚 and phrases from back them. April showers bring May flowers , I remember going outside as a kid in an April showers slow, easy rains & Luke warm .

12,000 years ago was an anomaly, the Younger Dryas. The last glacial max was 130,000 years ago. The next ice age will occur after global warming leads to the cessation of ocean currents and the equatorial currents no longer warm the polar regions, which will in turn lead to snow and ice raising the reflectivity of those polar regions, and subsequently rapid global cooling.

Just took a free class on cycles of climate changes and termination events while under my warm covers on this frosty morning. Thanks for this learning opportunity!

I remember in the mid to late 70's being told this very thing. Told this to my brother and he freaked out saying I was making it up. Sent him links for older magazine articles about it from MSM, his only response was "ya but still..."

As is usually the case when discussing what affects our climate, the most important influence is never mentioned. TSI, Total Solar Iradiance, is a measure of the energy arriving from the sun in the upper atmosphere in a 1 meter square area. When this reading is above average, we have a warm climate and lots of sun spots, when this reading is below average, we have a colder climate. To give an example, 1 degree Fahrenheit drop in the measure temperature will cause a Maunder Minimum climate temperature. During the Maunder Minimum, ice skating on the Thames river outside London was an everyday occurrence. The global climate hoaxers never take this data into account.

I love the "Context" the youtubes felt obligated to tag this video with. I'm not sure I'm entirely comfortable thinking for myself and feel better now that I have this correction from a highly reputable organization, in this case the UN, to tell me how to do it.

We should probably stop allowing politicians to tell us what is wrong with the world.

Love this video. Thank you.

In fact we are in an interglacial period of an ice age known as the Quartenary Glaciation.

I believe the sudden increase in methane can be correlated to the summer taco bell promotional event.

I'm grateful for having such high quality educational content for free. Thank you Dr Ben. 🍻✌️

Well for example Estonia is 23% wetlands. During the past 50 years, there has been enormous growth of digging trenches to dry out wetlands for pine wood monoculture production. Also peat mining has played a key part. As the wetlands dry out, the organic matter stored there starts to continue to decompose, releasing methane into the atmosphere. I don't know about much rest of the data, but I'd guess its important to point out that some of the natural cycles are triggered by human activities. Great video though, an interesting new perspective for me.

Historically, Ice Ages have followed periods of high atmospheric CO2, at >400 ppm, we are now at more than twice the level which triggered the last one.

I've said this for many years. I wish our so called 'climate scientists' and the WEF would watch this.

Why am I just now learning that we are currently in an ice age? School has let me down

The Inuit of northern Canada wrote a letter to NASA about their observations of the sun, moon, and stars not being where they should be in the sky, and it has nothing to do with seasonal changes. They also said that the ice was moving, not melting. The Inuit depend on knowing their environment for their very survival in harsh conditions. I noticed a few years ago, as I was placing clothes on the outside line to dry, that high noon was no longer high noon. A shift on our axis, perhaps.

The increase in greenhouse gases is not required to explain ice melting near the edge of the ice sheets. Total change in insolation (solar radiative input) at 68°C northern latitude (representative of approximate ice boundary) is about 60 W/m2, which is 20 times higher than the approx. 3 W/m2 of increased back-radiation from CO2 (according to this theory). The 3 on top of the 60 does not cause a positive feedback (however, exposed dark land surface does). Change in atmospheric CO2 levels is an effect, not a cause, of temperature changes.

I did a paper on the geomagnetic polar reversal and how it has potential of creating an ice age as a side effect. With more cosmic particles entering the atmosphere we are getting more "aerosols". Which are the basic building blocks of cloud formations. More clouds = more heat (per the greenhouse effect). The consequences of this can mean more glaciers are melting, diluting salt water with fresh water. This in turn can reduce or eliminate ocean currents, which would then plunge the northern hemisphere into an ice age. I wrote this paper back in 2013....so a lot has probably changed since then.

No mention made of the rapid movement of the magnetosphere (magnetic north pole) these past 130 years and how this also plays a role in the sudden natural changes of this planet. Industral revolution just coincidental in the time line of natures cycles. A better integration of other major componants need to be inserted into the equation. This is also a component to consider. Good video.

I just saw a new-ish episode of NOVA about Arctic Sink Holes. Massive amounts of methane are leaking out of holes in the tundra.

Interesting and informative vid. First of yours I’ve seen. Please forgive my lack of background on your previous videos. Perhaps someone here can tell me if the subject of the magnetic pole shift is factored in? And perhaps the diminishing magnetosphere? Thanks in advance.

Great video. Glad I found your channel.

In 2023 it's getting more and more rare for people to be able to say those all important words, "We don't know." People have gotten so damn terrified to admit they don't know something. Everything thinks they know everything. It forces everyone to pick a team and fight fight fight! Ignorance has become an insult, and it shouldn't We should embrace it. The first step to solving any problem is admitting there is one. You can't stop being ignorant on a topic until you admit you don't know. It's refreshing as hell to hear someone say the truth...... we don't know what this path of climate change is going to lead to. We have guesses. We don't have answers. Yet, anyway.

Number one factor affecting our planets weather is the sun and it's activity.

Excellent information, thank you

I am in no way a scientist , but with my meager memory of geology/earth history, I find it difficult for people to understand how the earth warms and cools on its own, with no help from man and his sport utility vehicles. AND that back in the 1970’s, scientists were very concerned that we were(and are) in an interglacial, and climates were cooling. Robert Ardry, a cultural anthropologist, wrote a book about it. People don’t understand that we are still warming from the last ice age( not even counting what they call the Little Ice Age).

Very interesting and easy to understand. Thank you for laying out the details.

My grandfather told me 40 years ago we were soon headed for another ice age. He worked for the DOD and many other federal agencies for over 40 years.

Thank you for creating this content Dr Miles. I do believe that the world needs to hold the scientists & engineers who build our world, to a similar level of appreciation and stardom as rockstars!

Examine the physics of the absorption spectrum of methane. It's a tiny spike far away from the "infrared window" where CO2 has some effect. It's also in a part of the spectrum in which water vapor totally and completely absorbs the radiation rendering methane 's effect moot.

If you're to believe NASA the poles have been unchanged since 1990. Also, they now measure temperates on the ground, not the air… In England this summer the record heat was measured on an RAF tarmac whilst several fighter jets were landing and taking off(!) at that very moment(!).

Last report i read on methane increases, much of the study came from ocean methane releases. Mass bacterial growths from ocean matter decay was producing a huge increase in methane, that report came out like 5-6 yrs ago.

Another reason methane might be overlooked is the fact that it has a relative short life in the atmosphere, I researched about enteric methane and this was brought quite frequent in conferences when presenting my research

It`s not helpful when you say that man was a main contributor to the extinction of megaphonia i.e. such as mammoths.....yet were also lead to believe that our ancestors were hunter gathers, who migrated with the seasons. This planet will out live us all!, and has been doing it`s "own" thing since time and memorial, all we can hope to do really is, ADAPT!

As a geologist I am fascinated by the fact that, in any case, no one of us will see another ice age, for sure. But in the future this will be something humans will deal with , and there is no anthropic global warming that could avoid this 🤣

I thought I read the methane was outgassing from tundra as the permafrost was melting due to rotting biomass - that is why there is more methane in the arctic. Also, with the warming oceans there is the Clathrate Gun Hypothesis. Even if we stop all emissions right now there is a couple of degrees c of increase already baked in. With 38c events in Siberia the tundra is definitely melting. Areas of the Canadian arctic are falling into the water as the permafrost melts.

Both the Arctic and Antarctic ice sheets are in a period of growth, despite the fact that we are in an ENSO and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) is in an active phase, bringing warm ocean currents into the Arctic. Of course the west Antarctic ice sheet has undergone some melting, due to the presence of about 90 active volcanoes underneath the ice. This would all suggest that we are entering into a new cooling period.

Ben, despite your extensive research I'm very surprised you make no point of 2006-2007 (onward) being a period which saw rapid acceleration of unconventional oil & gas extraction i.e. the fracking of shale deposits, particularly in the USA. Such wells were being drilled in their hundreds - thousands soon thereafter. The main prize was natural gas and meanwhile its extraction, venting, flaring, leaky containment and fugitive emissions were a serious problem (largely denied by the industries involved). The possibilities of this previously untapped resource was explored in the late 90's (around 1997) but commercial exploitation didn't really take off till 2006/7, especially after it was enabled by the 'Halliburton Loophole' of 2005 - making it possible, in law, to get around the the environmental hazards of that sort of extraction. Rapid decline-rates, particularly from shale wells, meant they were abandoned after a few years - ostensibly sealed, made safe, or sold off for 'long-tale' investors gleaning diminishing returns from ever-lower yields. In the US alone there are now about 4 million abandoned O&G wells, many still leaking gas.

I've been waiting with all the expert's proclamations, since the 1990's for the sea to swallow New York. 2000 nope, 2010, 2020, nope. How long do we have to wait!? 😂

A lot of politicians believe if we pay a lot more money in taxes........It'll stop

I was still a kid in the late 1950's when I learned we were at the last stages of the latest Ice Age...not news to me. What I did learn though that it's not necessarily the end stage, we're at an "Interglacial Period". I also know about the methane.

this is a fantastic resource to explain what is happening...Thank you

Thanks for such an informative video - you help to make complex science accessible.

Thank you for having a real talk about what is actually going on with our planet.

Kryon, a Channeled Entity, recently said "Winter is Coming." But before that fully happens, there WILL be a slight warming trend, then the Cold will come. Kryon also said this recent Methane Pollution and warming/cooling of the Atmosphere is NOT 'Our Fault', but part of a natural climate/weather cycle, though we may have hastened it a bit.

Very interesting, Dr. How would theYounger Dryas fit into all this? Particularly in relation to the hypothesis that it was caused by several massive asteroid/meteor collisions?

Fascinating! Thank you for sharing this information. I had not heard about the increase in methane.

You went past permafrost melting quite quick, I think it’s worth exploring that deeper. The tropics have been producing methane for a very long time already but the permafrost melting is very recent.

Milankovitch cycles describe the collective effects of changes in the Earth's movements on its climate over thousands of years. The term was coined and named after the Serbian geophysicist and astronomer Milutin Milanković. In the 1920s, he hypothesized that variations in eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession combined to result in cyclical variations in the intra-annual and latitudinal distribution of solar radiation at the Earth's surface, and that this orbital forcing strongly influenced the Earth's climatic patterns.

Do forests or other ecosystems absorb methane? Like could our destruction of say large sprawling Serengeti savannahs and other wild landscapes be a contributing factor?

What is the methane emissions from melting permafrost in northern Canada and Siberia? As much as I love the archeological discoveries from the permafrost my concern is the massive release from permafrost? The slumping in the north is drastic visually but does that correlate to modern volumes?

I remember a show about large amounts of frozen methane under the north Atlantic coming to the surface as we get warmer. What an amazing balancing act the earth has

Have they ruled out fracking releasing excess methane from rocks through the ground and into the atmosphere? Fracking became more and more used starting in 2006.

One of the most rational, informative and clarifying presentations on climate SCIENCE I have seen. Well done! I look forward to additions and updates from you.

Thank you for a well produced and highly informative presentation. Isn't it true that there are two more major factors which contribute even more to release of methane? Solar cycles of increased and highly variable radiation levels in which we are currently reaching an 11 year maxima (remember also that our earth is miniscule in comparison to our Sun). Secondly there have been many academic papers exhibiting significant evidence that approx every 12,000 years , a Geo Magnetic Excursion event (GME) takes place on earth (a pole shift). The reduction in earths magnetic field due to the GME also greatly reduces our protection from our Suns increasing radiation. These two factors may sugnificantly disrupt our Earths albido, perhaps with even greater effect than methane alone. Would these be interesting subjects to consider in one of your videos? Keep up the great work.

Thank you for explaining things in a manner that many should be able to understand. For years, since I was at an event hosting Patrick Moore and based on various lectures I have attended I have attempted to explain the various cycles and events that have had a dramatic effect on how this planet developed. Now I just need to point them here. I still however find it difficult to get some to undertsand that just about everything on this planet is carbon based.

Ben, great video, thanks. FYI the word 'glaciation' refers to snow and ice retention at either of the poles or both of them, The present glaciation started about 45 Mya with snow and ice accumulation on Antarctica and starting the Tertiary Glaciation. The ongoing decline of sea levels led to the Arctic becoming glaciated simce 2.58 Mya. The cause of the Tertiary glaciation is the galactic orbit of the solar system making it move upward from the galactic plane and causing the orbital inclinations of the planets to decline, vis-a-vis the obliquity of the Earth's spin axis. CO2 is like phlogiston; it actually does the opposite of what it is claimed to do. by bonding inversely proportional to temperature with H2O as carbonic acid and making that precipitate. Without the lighter than air H2O molecules suspending the heavier than air CO2 molecules they would form a toxic high pressure surface layer as it does on Venus , taken care of on Earth by forming the ocean covering 71% of the global surface to depths of around 8 km. John Bruyn. For more on that you can find me on Quora

In my life through the 70's and 80's in school, we were told many terrifying futures were coming. A big one was that the world would end by 2020 due to humans being irresponsible and that blonde hair wouldn't exist and be bred out by 2010 (oddly the hair thing bothered me even more). This scared me into thinking about these things, I've followed them closer then any peer, for some reason it didn't bother them. But as each predicted outcome has failed to come to fruition I began to think about modern science and how it can go into great detail, but the high tech sample size is so short being roughly 100 years out on a 4.5 billion years old planet.

Very informative with great graphics. Your commentary is a pleasure to listen to. Looking forward to watching more of these kinds of videos.

Show of hands. How many people here are sick to death of UKposts putting their 2 cents worth post under any video they don't like?

May I ask who your research sponsors are, and where you funding originates from.

so... I watch these with an open mind. But as usual, I'm left with one major thought in mind... All the "evidence" of past events we have are through scientific processes that we cannot confirm. For example: We invented the thermometer (as we think of it today) in the 1700s. It did not get into wide use and was mostly used in laboratories until the 1900s, and was not widespread in use until the 1950s and 1960s - this is when the backyard thermometers started cropping up. So if I asked you what the temperature was on July 30 in 1900, .... you might be able to give me the temperature in a few major cities, or scientifically appropriate locations, but not out in the middle of nowhere Kansas.... or the middle of the Great Salt Lake, in Utah... We only have "educated guesswork" for that. We can look at the sediment - what kind of plants were growing, how well they grew, etc. We can use knowledge we've since gained to tell us what temperatures can grow similar plants in the same environments.... But that doesn't tell us the temperature on July 30 in 1900 - only a general "The temperature was likely between XXX and YYY." Now take that to try and determine what the temperature was 20,000 years ago... when the area was supposedly covered by permafrost? Or was underwater? Again, we can look at the fossil record... but there's question there, even, as to how accurate that is. Imagine someone digging up fossils in an area and seeing creature A over creature B, over creature C, over creature D... That tells us D lived the longest ago. But it doesn't tell us HOW LONG ago.... And carbon dating is only accurate to a certain extent, after which you need to look at other - not as accurate - sources. So the fossil record tells us...... something - but how do we really know that creature D lived 140,000 years ago? Short answer: We don't. That, too, is "educated guesswork" So you have all these sources of guesswork that feed one another... "D lived 140,000 years ago.... and we see that it appears to have died off when the land was warmer, according to this plant that was growing in the same period.... and that plant seems like it acts like XXX that we find today, which dies off when the temperature averages over 50 degrees annually... so it appears that the average temperature 140,000 years ago was about 50 degrees." But... what if it were 150,000 years ago? Or 120,000? What if the temperature were warmer - 55 or 60 degrees average? What if it were really cooler? See, ther weren't thermometers... Educated guesswork. I'm not saying that's all bad, or shouldn't be used at all... but perhaps we should not treat it as a given. This video says something that I've been telling people for ... well, really, at least 35 years since Earth science classes in middle school - I think the Earth is still warming up from the last ice age, and we are but a small part of that. And the more I learn, the more I'm convinced of this. Did you know that the greenery in the United States absorbs more CO2 than we generate every year? .....but what are we doing? Cutting down trees and clearing fields to put up.... solar panels. Panels that absorb heat... panels that prevent greenery from growing on the ground.... and panels that do not absorb any CO2. So we're reducing the natural benefit to create artificial benefits that break down, and can't be recycled. More landfills. (And that's just one pet peeve....) But to get back to my example of the thermometer... We really DON'T know with great certainty what the temperature was 100,000 years ago... We're going on core samples taken and what we measure in them that MIGHT be from the period - if we understand the fossil record correctly - and MAYBE we have the data right. We can't measure from ice that melted 100,000 years ago... We can't measure from ice that melted 10,000 years ago... We can't measure from ice that existed before the dinosaurs roamed the Earth 63,000,000 years ago... And we then also need to take into account the fact that the Earth tectonic plates have been moving the land around over these millions of years... Surface has been covered in areas by salt... then silt... mud... forming layers of limestone... Then pushed upwards for a few thousand years to become a mountain... and on top of that mountain, after hundreds of thousands of years of erosion... suddenly we're taking core samples and saying the temperature was XXX when it was formed? Again - Educated guesswork... but it can only take us so far. At some point, we have to say "The best we can tell you with certainty is.... " And scientists are wont to tell us that. Gone are the days of theory, and we're left with "facts" that may not be as factual as they appear. The scientists that disagree with the "facts" of the day are shunned, unless they get their work in front of the right people .... and even then, we've seen papers make their way into journals that they later need to retract when they find out the sources were bogus, or the data made up.... but perhaps the damage was done, because some other scientist went into an area thinking the study lets them input certain data... and that's now faulty, but they don't know. And it snowballs..... But we don't know how cold that snowball was because it existed 300,000 years before the thermometer existed, on an island that is currently tropical, with an average daily high temperature of 77°F and low of 64°F, where snow hasn't been seen for at least 200,000 years. ...so that's what I see - a lot of educated guesswork. Perhaps the levels today are normal..... we just don't have the timeline right. What would that mean? I'll let you think about it.

When discussing obliquity at about 6:20, the graphics show melting north polar sea ice. This perpetuates the incorrect conclusion that floating ice that melts will contribute to sea level rise. Generally, only melting land based glaciers can contribute to sea level rise.

Thank you for explaining this in an understandable and engaging way.

3:31 This made me laugh SO freaking hard I had to stop the video to finish. Did not see that coming at all. Brilliantly done though.