I don't mean to lessen the impact of that statement. I think climate change is a serious problem. But also most of the geologic time that genus Homo has existed, Earth has been in an ice age. Much of which we'd consider a "snowball Earth". The last warm interglacial period, the Eemian, was 120,000 years ago.

That's an interesting bit of detail. As you intended, it does not lessen the impact of the statement: "conditions never witnessed by us or our prehistoric relatives". It confirms it, with some additional context.

To me, it seems to make it even more significant. Because as you point out, Homo evolved under ice age conditions over millions of years. Well, here we are about to be thrust into uncharted territory, in an extremely short period of time. With very fragile global interdependencies, an overpopulated planet, and billions of people exposed to the consequences.

The genus Homo dates back nearly 2 million years.

this is the same style comment as "no offense, but <offensive thing>"

if you didnt intend to lessen the impact of that statement, why say something that is specifically meant to lessen the impact of the statement? just say what you want to say without the hedging.

What you just wrote is the same as: 'the entire lifecycle of humanity has no precursor to the conditions' we are about to face.

We aren't facing the ice age that has been the last 120,000 years.

I'm sure the rocky planet will survive just fine, maybe even some extreemophiles, even if we completely screw up the atmosphere. Not 6 billion humans though.

[dead]