- 7 Signs a Region Is Becoming More Drought-Prone - September 26, 2026
- The 6 Most Extreme Environments Found on Other Planets - September 25, 2026
- 7 Ways Coral Reefs Respond to Warmer Ocean Water - September 25, 2026
Myth 1: Scientists still disagree about whether humans are causing climate change

This is probably the most repeated myth of all, and it’s also the one with the least support in the actual research. A comprehensive 2021 survey examining more than 88,000 peer-reviewed climate studies found that more than 99.9% of peer-reviewed scientific papers agree that climate change is mainly caused by humans. That’s not a narrow majority opinion, it’s about as close to unanimous as science gets on any contested topic.
NASA’s own science communications team puts it plainly, noting that the vast majority of actively publishing climate scientists, 97 percent, agree that humans are causing global warming and climate change. The gap between public perception of scientific debate and the reality of scientific consensus remains one of the more curious features of this whole conversation. Major science academies worldwide, along with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, have echoed the same conclusion for years now, and nothing in the 2024 to 2026 research cycle has shifted that picture.
Myth 2: A few unusually cold winters disprove global warming

It’s a common reaction. A brutal cold snap hits and someone jokes online that global warming must be a hoax. The problem is that this confuses weather, which is short term and local, with climate, which is measured over decades and across the entire planet.
The long-term data tells a very different story than any single cold week ever could. According to the World Meteorological Organization, the past eleven years, 2015 through 2025, are the eleven warmest years in all eight major global temperature datasets. Even a year like 2025, which arrived amid a cooling La Niña pattern that typically suppresses global temperatures, still ranked among the hottest on record, which is a sign of just how strong the underlying warming trend has become.
Myth 3: 2024 and 2025 heat records don’t really mean much

Some skeptics argue that record warm years are just noise, cherry picked data points that don’t reflect a real trend. The multi-year pattern says otherwise. NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies data shows that 2025, 2024, and 2023 were the three warmest years in NASA’s 146 year record.
What makes this especially notable is the three-year average. The WMO reported that the consolidated three-year average for 2023 to 2025 stands at 1.48 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial era, a margin that puts the planet uncomfortably close to the 1.5 degree threshold long discussed in international climate agreements. Yale Climate Connections similarly noted that the global three-year average temperature for 2023 to 2025 will likely exceed 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels for the first time. That’s not a fluke pattern, it’s a sustained trajectory tracked independently by multiple national and international agencies using different methods.
Myth 4: Natural cycles, not human activity, explain the recent warming

This myth has some intuitive appeal because Earth’s climate has indeed shifted many times over its long history due to volcanic activity, solar variation, and orbital changes. The trouble is that none of those natural drivers can account for the speed and pattern of warming observed since the mid-20th century. Natural cycles typically play out over thousands of years, not decades.
The scientific consensus statement referenced by NASA is direct about this point, concluding that human activities, especially greenhouse gas emissions, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century, with no alternative explanation supported by convincing evidence. Notably, 2025’s near-record heat occurred during a La Niña phase, a natural cooling pattern, which makes the persistence of extreme warmth even harder to explain without factoring in the human-driven greenhouse effect. When a warming signal shows up despite a natural cooling influence pushing the other direction, that’s a strong clue about what’s really driving the trend.
Myth 5: The effects of climate change are still distant, theoretical, or exaggerated

It’s tempting to think of climate change as something that will matter mostly for future generations, a slow-moving abstraction rather than a present reality. The 2025 data undercuts that framing pretty directly. NOAA’s assessment found that upper ocean heat content was record high in 2025, while annual sea ice extent for both the Arctic and Antarctic regions ranked among the three lowest years on record.
Storm activity told a similar story, with NOAA recording 101 named tropical storms across the globe in 2025, which was above average. Longer term projections add another layer of concern, since NASA estimates that U.S. sea levels are likely to rise between one and 6.6 feet by the year 2100. These aren’t hypothetical scenarios pulled from worst-case models, they’re observed measurements and near-term projections built from the same datasets used to track temperature records.
What the numbers actually tell us

Taken together, the picture that emerges from 2024 through 2026 data is remarkably consistent across independent agencies, from NASA and NOAA to the WMO and Copernicus in Europe. The warming trend isn’t dependent on any single dataset or research group cherry picking numbers. It shows up in satellite records, ocean buoys, ice core samples, and ground stations alike, all pointing in the same direction.
None of this means every claim about climate change floating around online is accurate either, since exaggeration and oversimplification happen on all sides of the conversation. What the evidence does support is a fairly narrow and well-documented set of conclusions: the planet is warming, human activity is the primary driver, and the pace of change over the past decade has been unusually fast by historical standards. Separating those established facts from the myths that keep circulating alongside them is really the whole point of looking closely at the data in the first place.
