Your label is wrong. The Vostok ice cores are a good source of information for climate history over the millennia, but they seem to be misused a lot; in this case, you are calling them global temperature records, but they are not
. The warm spot you see at -400, the one that would sort of imply modern changes aren't such a big deal, coincides with the little ice age in Europe. So on that timescale, you're only seeing local effects - or maybe noise, seeing how that's only three points - rather than making a proper comparison.
But the ice cores do give a good indication how much climate changes over hundreds of thousands of years, and living things have mostly coped, in the sense that over the many generations most have had some progeny that found new places to live or adapted to new conditions. It may not be fun to go through the same over a few decades, though. For instance the unusually long and pronounced drought in Syria hardly matters in the long run, humans can cope with that sort of thing; but the way we "coped" so far is by adding large amounts of destitute farmers to an unstable political situation and helping push it into a really horrible civil war. Sometimes the long perspective isn't all that matters.
alun009 wrote:While we're at it, it's aluminium not aluminum...
Aluminium always kind of bothers me, though, because it seems really poorly thought out. Yes, metals are supposed to end in -ium, and aluminum doesn't. That's because it was originally supposed to be alumium, but someone added an N. I know it's too late now, but if people didn't like that, why would they add yet another syllable instead of just changing it back?