Someone, who ridicules people for some characteristic while they are in the process of improving that characteristic, has understood so little about life.

Sorry, I am not from the US. So this guy consumed porn. And what? Relax people!

Might sound weird to prude people, but most politicians had sex before! Some may have kinks! Why do people care about other people's sex life, if they aren't attracted to them?

And what has this to do with a community called politics? I don't get it.

Edit: wow, many replies! Thank you all for educating. If this man is saying people shouldn't consume porn, then yes, you are all right and it's a controversy that makes sense to shine some light on. I didn't think about that.

The article is about an experiment, where people are exposed to 35°C wet bulb temperatures, but in different settings. Sometimes lower temperatures but higher humidity, sometimes vise versa, but always 35°C wet bulb temperature.

So far the assumption was, that humans can't survive a 35°C wet bulb temperature for longer than 6 hours. And at current warming this is unlikely to be naturally the case within this century.

However the experiment gives hints to believe that humans can't survive at lower wet bulb temperatures either. It looks like with lower temperatures and higher humidity, humans can get very close to that 35°C wet bulb temperature, however people seem to struggle more with higher temperatures and lower humidity.

A possible explanation could be, that while more sweat evaporates in lower humidity, the body has a limit for how much sweat it can produce. And if you keep raising the temperature, that the human body simply can't produce enough sweat to cool itself.

That's pretty much what I took away from the article. They mentioned they experiment with several people, however the article was mainly about on person in the experiment, a 30ish year old, athletic male.

Edit: add some graphs from the article. Sorry for low quality, but as you said, the layout is quite atrocious and on my phone it keeps jumping around on it's own, so I lost patience.

Great! Gojira is my favorite environmentalist metal band! Love their often interesting rhythmic choices and their atmospheric sounds.

My wife, but please don't call me that!

From the article:

In 2020, new regulations required the shipping industry to use cleaner fuels that reduce sulfur emissions. Sulfur compounds in the atmosphere are reflective and influence several properties of clouds, thereby having an overall cooling effect. Preliminary estimates of the impact of these rules show a negligible effect on global mean temperatures — a change of only a few hundredths of a degree. But reliable assessments of aerosol emissions rely on networks of mostly volunteer-driven efforts, and it could be a year or more before the full data from 2023 are available.

I think that's true for only a planet with indefinite resources. We haven't really hit many caps yet, but I believe things will start to slow down within a lifetime.

And when they're moving, they're highly inefficient as well. With a displacement ship hull designed to part the water their top speed is limited by their own length. A ship cannot overtake its own bow wake and with a length of let's say 70 meters you end up at a top speed of about 20 knots. Which isn't slow, but also not that much faster than cargo or passenger transport (maybe going 10 to 15 knots).

While a cargo ship is mostly longer and could theoretically sail faster, it is designed to be economical. It gets an engine that is most efficient at a certain speed, for example 12 knots at ahead standard, the propeller is cut for efficiency etc.

A yacht is designed to be comfortable and fast. It gets powerful engines that combust however much they need to combust. The propeller may be designed to produce less noise or vibration instead of being most fuel efficient.

I really don't get it. Why surprised? Surprised that a man, who leads major fossil fuel companies, works against regulating the fossil fuel industry.

Nothing thrills my empty soul like a life long game of Climate Russian Roulette.

The title kinda implies we get to net zero at all.

Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that one day on Earth there will be net zero carbon emissions. But will it be because humanity plans to and will work on it or because we screwed things up so badly.

I don't have a good feeling about that.

Doctor, are you saying I don't need to change my habits and stop my alcoholism in order to help my dying liver? I can just eat painkillers and will feel like normal? Cheers!