Climate change used to be described in the future tense. That grammar is becoming harder to defend. The World Meteorological Organization reports that the years 2015 through 2025 were the eleven hottest on record. The average global temperature in 2025 was about 1.43°C above the 1850–1900 reference level.

Behind the number is a planetary accumulation of energy. The ocean absorbs vast amounts of excess heat, and glaciers and sea ice respond over time. The WMO reports record-high ocean heat content in 2025 and warns that some consequences of current warming will persist for centuries or longer. A single annual temperature does not define the Paris Agreement threshold, which concerns sustained warming; confusing the two can mislead readers in either direction.

This is the product of choices repeated at enormous scale: fossil fuels burned, forests removed, methane released and infrastructure built for decades of future emissions. Each government and industry decision adds to or reduces that momentum. The effects are uneven, falling hardest on many communities that contributed least to the problem.

There is no honest point at which a journalist can declare the precise date humanity loses control. The future depends on emissions, adaptation and natural systems that science continues to study. But the observed heat is real, and the direction is clear enough to support a far more immediate question: how much additional damage are we willing to choose?