You’ve probably seen it by now. National Geographic and every major outlet are screaming some version of:
“2024 was the hottest year ever—and the coldest year of the rest of your life.”
It’s a clever bit of psychological framing: evoke fear and inevitability in a single sentence. But it only works if you ignore both context and history. [emphasis, links added]
These headlines are not scientific conclusions; they are marketing slogans designed to reinforce a narrative: today’s warming is not just unusual, but unprecedented and therefore catastrophic.
That claim collapses the moment you ask a simple question:
Compared to what?
To keep the climate panic engine running, each year must be declared the hottest, every anomaly must be historic, and every event must be framed as proof of worsening climate extremes.
This isn’t about science anymore—it’s about maintaining an illusion of crisis to justify more money, more control, and more censorship of dissenting views.
I’ve unpacked this manipulation in past articles. For example, in this critique of the 125,000-year claim, I break down the absurdity of comparing satellite-era temperatures to smoothed, proxy-based estimates from deep time.
It’s akin to measuring your body temperature to two decimal places and stacking it against someone’s vague approximation derived from rudimentary sketches.
In another piece, I explain how modern temperature data is “spliced” onto older reconstructions, creating an artificial jump that makes the present look uniquely hot.
The real trick? Older data gets smoothed into a flat line, while modern data preserves all the variability. It’s not science… It’s pseudoscientific graphic design.
And finally, in my analysis on smoothing, I show how this methodological choice erases the significant swings in natural climate variability that occurred throughout the Holocene. The more you smooth the past, the scarier the present looks.
These pieces lay the groundwork for what’s really happening: the manufacturing of climate alarm through statistical trickery.
Why the “Hottest Year Ever” Narrative Needs to Erase the Past
For climate change to be perceived as an existential threat, the warming must be portrayed as not just rapid, but unprecedented.
This is why every temperature record today is measured not against a full climate history, but against the narrow window of the industrial era, roughly 1850 to present.
Conveniently, that [start date] also coincides with the end of the Little Ice Age, one of the coldest stretches of the Holocene.
What gets omitted are the much warmer periods that came before, including the Holocene Thermal Maximum (HTM), which occurred between 9,000 and 5,000 years ago.
During this period, most of the Northern Hemisphere was significantly warmer than today, despite preindustrial CO2 levels.
We know this because:
- Glaciers are retreating and revealing ancient forests in the Canadian Rockies, carbon-dated to over 5,000 years ago.
- Bronze Age artifacts are being recovered from beneath melting alpine ice across Europe, particularly in the high mountains of Norway, Austria, and Switzerland. Archaeologists have found weapons, clothing, tools, and even wooden skis dating back thousands of years, many from the Bronze Age or earlier. These discoveries reveal that humans regularly traversed high-elevation passes that today are buried under ice and were clearly ice-free during warmer periods of the Holocene.
- Dozens of peer-reviewed reconstructions show widespread warming across Europe, Asia, and the Arctic.
These observations are not new, but they are routinely omitted from climate reports and media coverage because they contradict the core message: that modern warming is uniquely dangerous.
If you’d like to see the full list of studies and evidence, I broke it all down in detail in my Holocene deep dive linked above.
So Why the Silence?
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: if the public were shown a clear picture of past climate, especially the Holocene Thermal Maximum, the entire narrative of unprecedented warming would collapse.
Because if the world was warmer before across nearly every land surface at preindustrial levels of CO2, then current warming must be understood differently.
And if warming isn’t exceptional, it isn’t automatically catastrophic. That undermines the premise for net-zero policies, climate emergency declarations, and the continued relevance of the IPCC itself.
Which brings us to two powerful new peer-reviewed studies, each one reinforcing the reality of widespread Holocene warmth.
One reconstructs land temperatures across Africa from multiple proxies; the other analyzes an 8,000-year-old oyster shell to estimate ancient sea surface temperatures in the Pacific.
Together, they deliver a body blow to the idea that modern warming is either unusual or alarming.
Mainstream outlets won’t touch them, and the IPCC will almost certainly ignore them.
Irrational Fear is written by climatologist Dr. Matthew Wielicki and is reader-supported. If you value what you have read here, please consider subscribing and supporting the work that goes into it.
Read rest at Irrational Fear
