[less_less]

I think @isthisthingon99 is objecting to an implication that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is the sole or even primary cause of things in the ice, such as Ötzi's corpse, being exposed. The new research suggests that the corpse was exposed several times over the millenia, obviously predating AGW, so why does the article tie exposure so closely to AGW?

But I don't think how the article is framing it is problematic. AGW has greatly increased the net rate of ice melting in most of the world. I'm not an archaeologist, but I would suspect that means things buried in ice are being exposed much more frequently now. So while other causes (eg non-anthropogenic or local warming) would have driven previous exposures, AGW might be the primary cause these days.

If that's true, then laying it out like the article does makes complete sense: AGW-driven melting is exposing what's under the ice, and the new research suggests that there may be more interesting remains under the ice than previously thought, so hikers might find some interesting stuff over the next decades.