TIL that Earth is technically in an Ice Age

The central claim is that Earth should be considered to be in an ice age because there is persistent ice at both poles, and that for roughly 80% of geological time the poles lacked perennial ice. That argument hinges on a narrow definition of "ice age" based on bipolar ice existence rather than everyday usage; it presents a concise, attention-grabbing reframing of how people think about current climate by pointing to polar ice as the defining criterion.

Replies in the discussion add technical nuance and divergent interpretations. Several contributors correct the framing by noting the present interval is an interglacial within a longer Pleistocene ice age, with the Holocene beginning about 11,700 years ago. Others project long-term shifts toward much warmer conditions on century-to-centuries timescales, suggesting temperate zones and agricultural winners will migrate poleward. A contrasting thread argues that glaciations are geologically rare, that current low CO2 and temperatures correlate with reduced biodiversity, and uses that point to criticize alarmist climate messaging. The exchange blends a factual clarification about glacial cycles, speculative projections about regional winners and losers, and ideological disagreement over how to interpret climate risk.