New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

What Explains Past Climate Change?

Was the climate really hotter during medieval times? David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Roughly 1,000 years ago, Europe enjoyed several centuries of balmier average temperatures. Dubbed the "Medieval Warm Period," it was the last time before the present that agriculture could flourish in Greenland. This era also shows yet again that changes to natural systems can drive local climate change—and provided fodder for countless misunderstandings about the nature of present day global warming. But new research shows that the MWP, as it is affectionately known in acronym-happy science circles, as well as the "Little Ice Age" that almost immediately followed it (and spelled doom for the Greenland Norse) were likely the result of fluctuations in the sun's strength and the frequency of volcanic eruptions, among other natural causes. Cores drilled from ancient ice sheets as well as of the coral reef and lake sediment varieties show that at the same time as Europe enjoyed average temperatures as warm as today, the tropical Pacific was unusually cold. This suggests that natural cycles—such as the succession of El Nino and La Nina conditions in the Pacific Ocean—forced these climate anomalies. Unfortunately, neither the sun nor other natural cycles can entirely explain the recent warming trend that has brought potatoes back to coastal Greenland. To date, the only explanation that matches those observations are a concurrent rise in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere.  CO2 and its peers now are responsible for trapping an extra three watts per square meter of planet. And if that continues, the MWP will end up looking like an ice age. 

—David Biello

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe