Increasing temperatures

[Anonymous No.16173288]

What are we going to do when America becomes uninhabitable due to the increasing wet-bulb temps?

[Anonymous No.16173298]

>>16173288
>without AC, you die
my house never had AC and i am still alive after all these years

[Anonymous No.16173318]

>>16173288
>94F
>no amount of shade or hydration can save you
>Without AC, you die.
If that were true humans would have gone extinct before making it out of Africa.

[Anonymous No.16173398]

Before this thread gets filled with hundreds of dummies, the map is referring to places with high humidity. You can't hide from the heat at 100% humidity. Sweat doesn't evaporate and shade doesn't cool. Saying you'll just drop dead without AC is dumb though since you can still use other methods to cool off, like cold water

[Anonymous No.16173410]

>>16173398
Why not just seed clouds until it rains, and drop the humidity?

[Anonymous No.16173423]

>>16173398
Anyone who knows anything at all about the Southeastern US knows about the humidity. If a 94°F day in 100% humidity was deadly. I and everyone who has spent a summer in the region would have died already. The pre-Columbian population would have been nonexistent. Similar climates in South America, Asia, Africa, Australia, and Southern Europe would likewise be depopulated. This is just another twitter screencap thread making fun of climate alarmists.

[Anonymous No.16173445]

My AC isn't working because my neighbor doesn't have an AC. Those anti-ACers are gonna kill us all. Quick, I need another booster AC.

[Anonymous No.16173460]

>>16173423
For me, it's riding my bike 15 or so miles in July and then finding a subdivision that has a community pool I can break into and go for a swim.
t. convicted felon floridaman

[Anonymous No.16173465]

>muh wet bulb
lmao

[Anonymous No.16173468]

how many people died?

[Anonymous No.16173655]

>>16173318
not the same situation. and yes, people do die in Africa nowadays from excess heat, have no doubt

[Anonymous No.16173668]

>>16173410
Theoretically, it could be done, but would it be feasible to do once this becomes a daily necessity, for areas as large as the entire SE USA? Apart from that, what effects would spraying so much cloud-seeding material have on the environment and public health? It's just that some of those substances are quite toxic, like silver iodine, that's all.

[Anonymous No.16173672]

>>16173288
I wish that were true, yet pajeets exist and are multiplying without ac

[Anonymous No.16173676]

>>16173423
>94°F day in 100% humidity
The point is exactly that those conditions are, or were until now, extremely rare. The question is exactly how will the SE USA handle things once they become more commonplace.
One cannot be away from an AC unit for long. I forget exactly how long an average person would last in such conditions, but it's a matter of a few hours, if not even quicker.

[Anonymous No.16173677]

>>16173655
There is a monumental difference between "people die from excess heat" and "No amount of shade or hydration can save you. Without AC, you die." Do you understand why?

[Anonymous No.16173680]

>>16173468
look for the relative humidity now. Specifically, look for days when both the temperature reached at least 94F AND the humidity was NO LESS than 100%

[Anonymous No.16173683]

>>16173677
Now, living in the damn African tropics and having no AC whatsoever, I wonder how many wet bulb death incidents they have in the continent?

[Anonymous No.16173698]

The highest temperature recorded in most states happened over half a century ago. The few that have "broken" records in recent years actually only tied previous records. Then there's New Mexico, which not long ago had its highest recorded temperature ever. The location of the weather station that recorded that highest temperature? A nuclear waste site.

[Anonymous No.16173700]

>>16173680
OP's article didn't say the actual relative humidity was 100% at that time. The wet bulb temperature only tells you that IF the humidity WERE 100% what would be happening. Show me proof that there was actually 100% relative humidity on the days described by OP's article.

[Anonymous No.16173707]

>>16173676
I grew up in Alabama and we had temperatures and humidity that high from mid spring until late autumn. We didn't have AC in our house, our car didn't have AC (you rolled down the windows), our school buses didn't have AC, our schools didn't have AC. We used box fans and we lived. If you wanted AC, you'd go to the movies or the mall in the next county.
But that was the 80s and most of us weren't fat, much less obese. Walking around with the fat equivalent of an arctic parka is what causes people to overheat. 95 degrees with 99 percent humidity was uncomfortable but not a huge deal when we weren't a bunch of fatties.

[Anonymous No.16173709]

>>16173683
>>16173318
>>16173423
Most tropical climates actually don't get very hot, it's just that they never have winter and don't get cold at night.

[Anonymous No.16173727]

>>16173700
People who don't handle high humidity well will tell you with a straight face that a 30c 50% humditity day is wet bulb.
Fat unhealthy people struggle below wet bulb. Get stronger.

[Anonymous No.16173778]

>>16173709
>don't get cold at night
Yes they do lol? The sahara desert is chilly af at night, why would things not get colder when heat energy is decreasing?

[Anonymous No.16173825]

>>16173298
>>16173318
Google "wet bulb temperature" and then realize what morons you are.

[Anonymous No.16173829]

This thread is full of retards

[Anonymous No.16173838]

>>16173825
See: >>16173700
I don't give a shit about some hypothetical scenario that would happen IF the humidity was at 100%. Was the actual condition in those areas 94F with 100% humidity? I doubt it, otherwise they would have said that instead of citing the wet bulb temperature. Show me proof that those were the actual physical conditions that day or I'll continue to write it off as propaganda.

[Anonymous No.16173847]

>>16173778
>Sahara
>Tropical

[Anonymous No.16173857]

>>16173838
>I don't give a shit about some hypothetical scenario that would happen IF the humidity was at 100%
Google "wet bulb temperature" and then realize what a moron you are.

[Anonymous No.16173863]

>>16173288

Oh no sound the alarm we're all going to die!

[Anonymous No.16173876]

>>16173857
Maybe you should first, but I'll help you out here:
>The wet-bulb temperature is the temperature read by a thermometer covered in water-soaked cloth over which air is passed. At 100% relative humidity, the wet-bulb temperature is equal to the air temperature
Now, again, show me proof that those were the actual physical conditions that day or I'll continue to write it off as propaganda. While you're at it, show me where the thermometers were located.

[Anonymous No.16173882]

>>16173876
>At 100% relative humidity, the wet-bulb temperature is equal to the air temperature
That just means that at other values of humidity the wet bulb temperature is different than the actual temperature, you moron. Is English your second language?

Here play around.
https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/wet-bulb

[Anonymous No.16173883]

>>16173288
No date, no sauce. We can't verify it like so, anon.

[Anonymous No.16173885]

>>16173709
>Most
I spoke of the possible exceptions, not the rule.

[Anonymous No.16173887]

lmao imagine dying to summer weather

[Anonymous No.16173891]

>>16173778
>>16173847
You are confounding location with climate. Tropical climates do not get cold at night. The Sahara, though a great part of it is located in the Tropics (that is, south of the Tropic of Cancer), is not a tropical climate area. You're both right, you just need to clear things up. :)

[Anonymous No.16173893]

>>16173876
>show me proof that those were the actual physical conditions that day
anon makes a good point, see my post:
>>16173883

[Anonymous No.16173898]

>>16173825
>>16173857
>People prior to the 1950s all died when it got over 94
Kek. I grew up in an old farm house with no AC or a furnace. No fans either. The inside of my house could reach temperatures over 100F and high humidity.
>>16173876
Wetbulb temperatures at 94F are nothing, regardless. Sucks, but it is manageable. Go jump in a creek or something if it bothers you so much.

[Anonymous No.16173899]

>>16173893
No he doesn't, he just doesn't understand what a wet bulb temperature is. See >>16173882

[Anonymous No.16173901]

>>16173898
>People prior to the 1950s all died when it got over 94
Non sequitur. Wet bulb temperatures very rarely got above 95F before 1950 and heat deaths did in fact happen and continue to happen. Did you want to try again?

[Anonymous No.16173906]

>>16173898
>Wetbulb temperatures
>Go jump in a creek or something if it bothers you so much.
If the wet bulb temperature is above 95F then you cannot cool down by submerging yourself in a body of water.

[Anonymous No.16173910]

>>16173899
Where were the thermometers located, anon?

[Anonymous No.16173912]

>>16173901
>>16173906
>before 1950
It was never recorded before 1950, or known, want to try again? Heat deaths happen, yes, and it's not exactly uncommon.
>>16173906
Yes you can, especially a natural body of water, a creek completely covered by trees doubly so.

[Anonymous No.16173913]

>>16173899
>No he doesn't
I mean in regards to verifying the supposed data in OP's image, not his comprehension (or lack of) about the wet bulb effect.

[Anonymous No.16173917]

>>16173912
>It was never recorded before 1950, or known, want to try again?
Wet bulb temperature is a recent concept but that does not mean that there wasn't lethal conditions of temperature and humidity throughout history.

>Yes you can, especially a natural body of water, a creek completely covered by trees doubly so.
No, you can't. A wet bulb is effectively submerged in water. You cannot cool yourself below the wet bulb temperature using a body of water.

[Anonymous No.16173920]

>>16173913
You can verify the data by finding the tweet, opening the image, and reading the source and date which are illegible in the OP, but still obviously in that image.

[Anonymous No.16173923]

>>16173920
Alright, fair enough. Laborious but not impossible.

anon,
>>16173876
did you get that? If you truly want answers, get to work

[Anonymous No.16173928]

>>16173917
A wet bulb is testing the evaporative heat transfer. Jumping into a body of water that is cooler than the air will cool you down, evaporation of water is not the only way to cool down. When you leave the water, then you can't cool down, but you can stay in the water.

[Anonymous No.16173930]

>>16173928
That body of water is also in contact with the air. The environment heats up the water. Do you think bathtubs are magic or something?

[Anonymous No.16173936]

>>16173930
Yes, because running water always fully matches the air temperature all the way to the bottom.

[Anonymous No.16173941]

>>16173936
It doesn't have to match the air temperature, it has to match the wet bulb temperature. Submerging yourself in water is 100% humidity.

[Anonymous No.16173946]

If temperatures truly get too hot then we would use stratospheric aerosol injection. It's about 1000 times cheaper than trying to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Plus there would probably be major agricultural productivity boosts from a higher concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. It could be a serious win-win to keep burning fossil fuels until they are too expensive.

[Anonymous No.16173952]

>>16173946
Not if you block out the sun, idiot.

[Anonymous No.16173954]

>>16173946
If there are unintended side effects, how easy would it be to undo this?

[Anonymous No.16173955]

>>16173941
You're so fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.16173958]

>>16173955
That's projection.

[Anonymous No.16173967]

>>16173958
>the air is X degrees at 100% relative humidity
>therefore rivers of running water are X degrees all the way down to the riverbed
If you think this is true you are so retarded I have to assume it's a trolling attempt just to retain my sanity.

[Anonymous No.16173968]

>>16173946
>then we would use stratospheric aerosol injection
We already started some testing, like a few months ago only. Let's see what comes of those experiments.

[Anonymous No.16173979]

>>16173967
Not to mention springs. There's a spring in the woods near me that's 50F year round.

[Anonymous No.16173990]

>>16173288
>over 35 you die
>it's 40 everyday where I live with high humidity
>no deaths

[Barkon No.16173992]

It was hot yesterday and it's spring. Summers probs gonna be 42-45. The Sun is going to send a gravitational pulse at Earth soon to kill all the criminals leftists

HNHHKH

[Anonymous No.16173994]

>>16173968
>let's just blot out the sun, I'm sure nothing could go wrong with that

[Anonymous No.16174003]

>>16173994
well, I too would prefer avoiding geoengineering, but since dumping CO2 in the atmosphere is already going wrong, something must be attempted other than convincing consumers and politicians to do what needs to be done.

[Anonymous No.16174007]

>>16173952
>>16173994
You would only need to reduce sunlight by a very small fraction, less than 1%. This would have negligible effect on agricultural yields, and the increased CO2 levels would more than make up for it.

[Anonymous No.16174015]

>>16174003
Nothing needs to be done, the climate cycles on its own with or without us.

[Anonymous No.16174016]

>>16173990
>with high humidity
is it 100%? It has to be at least 100% for it to be a valid argument in this thread.

[Anonymous No.16174033]

>>16174015
Sure, but that'll take at some 50 000 years for nature to recapture the CO2, and in the meantime we're risking absolute tragedy.
It's hard to estimate just how things will develop in detail, obviously, but the last estimate I saw gave a number of at least 500 million migrants relocating worldwide, dislocated due to lack of water and mass crop failures by the end of the century. Othe are estimating 1.2 billion migrats around 2050. Neither scenario seems easy to deal with, imagine the chaos.

[Anonymous No.16174034]

>>16173946
Even testing was killed off in court.

[Anonymous No.16174036]

>>16174033
>take at some
take at least some*

[Anonymous No.16174037]

>>16173676
>One cannot be away from an AC unit for long.
sounds like it's of critical importance that we prioritize cheap energy then, to save lives

[Anonymous No.16174055]

>>16174037
sure, that's why we're working on nuclear fusion. Also, in general, renewable energy is already cheaper/watt than hydrocarbons, so we're on our way; it took too long, but we're finally there.
pic related (it's already from 2017, so it's cheaper still now)

[Anonymous No.16174067]

>>16173707
So fat people will die? Awesome, I’m going to keep fucking up the climate

[Anonymous No.16174095]

>>16173288
What race lives in those areas though

[Anonymous No.16174098]

>>16174016
It's cloudy when it rains, retard, that temperature is never achieved at that high of a humidity.
"Wet bulb" temperatures have nver existed outside of hot springs and volcanos.

[Anonymous No.16174102]

>>16174034
My take is that the elite are still testing in secret, under the plausible deniability of contrails. The green energy transition is the opportunity of a lifetime to fleece the public through wasteful government expenditures. They can't let people know the solution is far cheaper than commonly prescribed.

[Anonymous No.16174107]

>>16173954
Most of these aerosols only stay in the stratosphere for about 10 or 20 years. Calcium carbonate is proposed as the alternative to sulfur dioxide, since it's basic and wouldn't react with ozone. It's also cheap, literally limestone dust.

[Anonymous No.16174108]

>>16173829
oh but not you

[Anonymous No.16174111]

>>16173676
Where do you live? Northern Europe?

[Anonymous No.16174114]

>>16173288
The solution is EZ AF. Once all the vermin is exterminated the whores with degrees that worked for them will get the rope, and this absurd fear mongering will stop.

[Anonymous No.16174117]

>>16173825
>100% humidity
Nigga things we living in water like a ghoti, haha, Like nigga, we are above water how could that even happen?

[Anonymous No.16174119]

>>16173917
>it won't evaporate cool
Ground and water is cold and can directly cool.

[Anonymous No.16174136]

>>16173825
You are a complete ignorant idiot. Far more people die from low temperatures than overheated, and is the clinically obese who die from overheat as punishment for their gluttony.

[Anonymous No.16174147]

>>16173288
coincidence I'm sure, but made me think of this

[Anonymous No.16174173]

>>16174117
>>16174119
>>16174136
Retard takes

[Anonymous No.16174258]

>>16174098
Indeed, it is rare, and the point is exactly that they are becoming more common.
As per your answer, it implies that you don't know or you're not sure. It'd have been easier if you had just said that.

[Anonymous No.16174270]

>>16174034
in California they did some testing, but it was halted due to health concens
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/13/climate/cloud-brightening-geoengineering.html

[Anonymous No.16174274]

>>16174173
Fails to refute, here is your (you)

[Anonymous No.16174284]

>>16174270
California is notoriously safetyist and inefficient. Almost nothing gets built here anymore because of NIMBY retards.

[Anonymous No.16174331]

>>16174067
The climate doesn't need to be fucked up for fat people to die of their gluttony.

[Anonymous No.16174348]

WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE

[Anonymous No.16174349]

>>16174284
Irrelevant to the discussion, but thanks for your unwarranted opinion.

[Barkon No.16174354]

>>16174349

[Anonymous No.16174357]

>>16174354

[Anonymous No.16174366]

>>16174270
Just how could sea salt particles plausibly be described as unhealthy? What is next, will they drain the Pacific of the salt?

[Anonymous No.16174371]

>>16174349
Since you also appear to be one of retards I will explain it for you. There was no proof the health concerns were justified, and such alarmist lawfare is widespread in California, as seen with the high speed rail project. The halting of tests is emblematic of a much deeper problem in the West which has stymied dynamism broadly. You can see the effects with zoning laws limiting housing supply causing unaffordability, healthcare costs, anemic growth, infrastructure delays and cost overruns, etc.

[Anonymous No.16174381]

>>16174366
I don't know which substance they tested, the article is paywalled for me, sorry. There are many different types of "salt", it might not be NaCl, that's all.

[Anonymous No.16175150]

>>16174371
Stubborn motherfucker talking about irrelevant shit again. Go bitch about California politics on /pol/.

[Anonymous No.16175507]

>>16173288
God, soon I hope. The diabetic screeching would be amazing to hear

[Anonymous No.16175515]

>>16173906
You actually can, all wet bulb does is measure the efficiency of evaporative cooling. Running water will cool you off fine, as long as it's below body temperature.

[Anonymous No.16175519]

>>16174033
So if we import more Guatemalans we'll get more rain??

[Anonymous No.16175877]

>>16173946
>Would
Lmao imagine trying to sound smart and saying "would" here.

[Anonymous No.16175889]

>>16173778
>The sahara desert is chilly af at night,
no it doesnt

[Anonymous No.16176749]

>>16174016
no
OP pic didn't specify humidity
it could as well be above 94F with humidity below 100%, this would get you the same wet bulb temperature as 94F with 100% humidity
>>16174055
it doesn't count the absolutely massive (maybe impossible, we used all the easiest sites and we have hours worth of storage and WEEKS would be needed) amount of pumped hydro storage we would need to go fully renewable (since renewable isn't constant)

[Anonymous No.16177040]

>>16175515
Which it won't be because it's in the same place as you.

[Anonymous No.16177093]

>>16177040
>the temperature of running water matches air temperature all the way down
Have you EVER been outside in your life? Seriously, how can you be this ignorant to something so basic?

[Anonymous No.16177109]

As someone who lives in this area it’s clear to me that the prevalence of days like this has only gone up with the years so I err on the side of believing in climate change but like many of the others in this thread have said it’s really not as deadly as the twitter alarmists would have you think. 90-100% humidity has been the standard for late summer and early autumn for about 20 to 30 years. It’s certainly not going to kill you if you stand out in it for a couple of hours. If that were the case then like basically all of my blue collar, outdoor job family would have been dead for a long time now. Yankees just can’t handle it and would prefer to think us as mutants rather than consider that their criteria for unlivable heat is inaccurate.

[Anonymous No.16177257]

if it's 100%
humidity
that means it's going to rain

[Anonymous No.16177536]

>>16173288
>wet bulb above X will kill you
I understand where the claim's coming from, but humans (and many other animals) have successfully inhabited places where these temperatures and conditions are reasonably common, which to me disproves the supposedly lethality of it.

[Anonymous No.16177541]

>>16173655
>people do die in Africa nowadays from excess heat, have no doubt
The goalposts set by environmentalists is the world ending and everyone dying. This has not happened, so the environmentalists lose the argument.

[Anonymous No.16177547]

>>16173825
>It's never gotten above 94 degrees at 60% humidity before in all of history.
Are you really so stupid you believe this? Truly?

[Anonymous No.16177558]

>>16174173
As the climate warms, heat related deaths will rise, but cold related deaths will decrease. In most areas this is a reduction in deaths.
Envrionmentalists neglect to even mention less cold deaths.

[Anonymous No.16177561]

>>16177547
>>16177558
Retard takes.

[Anonymous No.16177568]

I'm convinced that climate change deniers are retarded suburbanites that spend maybe a few hours a year in nature. You'd have to be fucking blind to not notice the change in past 20 years, living in the mountains.

[Anonymous No.16177791]

>>16177568
This.

[Anonymous No.16177809]

>>16177568
No one is saying the climate is static, what's in question is the cause and whether or not humans have any bearing on climate cycles.

[Anonymous No.16177818]

>>16177809
Live in a big city for less than a month and you'll understand how much we can fuck up the climate. Are climate change deniers on /aci/ misinformation agents? Or just a couple of 2-3 obsessed chuds?

[Anonymous No.16177839]

>>16173288
imagine actually believing 95F @ 100% humidity would kill anybody but vaxxies & trannies & mods (but I repeat myself)

[Anonymous No.16177849]

>>16177839
Do some science. Set a sauna to 94 F and see how long you can stay in there. If you can last 5 hours then you win!

[Anonymous No.16177853]

>>16177849
imagine (a) staying outside for 5 hours in any weather (b) being such a faggot swede you just have a sauna lying around somewhere

[Anonymous No.16177866]

>>16177853
You aren't willing to perform the experiment?

[Anonymous No.16177932]

>>16177853
>outside for 5 hours
You think humidity won't come indoors? It's fine with AC, but if it goes out then your house becomes the same climate as outside. I live in the middle of the "death bubble" and had to spend a summer without AC, so I know. You can use box fans and cold water from the tap to cool off a bit but you'll be sweating bullets even trying to sleep butt naked

[Anonymous No.16177944]

>>16177809
That's not the question, that question was answered decades ago.

[Anonymous No.16178283]

>>16177932
>I live in the middle of the "death bubble" and had to spend a summer without AC
And you're not dead.

[Anonymous No.16178303]

>>16177932
You're obese. People have been living in high temperature, high humidity climates for hundreds of thousands of years. It wasn't a problem until recently when people like you stopped having any self restraint, shoving high amounts of calorically dense food into your pie hole all day long.

[Anonymous No.16178307]

Imagine going back to 2011 and saying nonsense terms like "wet bulb temperature", "heat dome", "Earth overshoot day", "Juneteenth", etc. They would probably arrest you.

[Anonymous No.16178415]

>>16178307
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17765661/
>HISTORY OF WBGT: WBGT was invented and first used during the 1950s as one element in a successful campaign to control serious outbreaks of heat illness in training camps of the United States Army and Marine Corps.

>https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/us/23dome.html
>"Heat dome" has become a popular term for the weather phenomenon tormenting the middle and eastern parts of the country,

https://overshoot.footprintnetwork.org/about-earth-overshoot-day/
>The idea of Earth Overshoot Day was first suggested by our colleague Andrew Simms, who then worked at the UK think tank New Economics Foundation. That Foundation then partnered with Global Footprint Network in 2006 to launch the first global Earth Overshoot Day campaign. WWF, the world’s largest conservation organization, has participated in Earth Overshoot Day since 2007.

Your ignorance is not evidence that other people are insane.

[Anonymous No.16178417]

>>16173778
>Its going to be a winter of death for the unvaccinated
>Its going to be a summer of death for the climate deniers
And yet I am still alive.

[Anonymous No.16178420]

>>16177040
Water has a high heat capacity and there is a lot of fucking water out there.

[Anonymous No.16178421]

>>16173930
>baths cannot be cooler than the room they are in

[Anonymous No.16178424]

>>16173930
>Its 95 degree wet bulb in New Orleans
>Therefore the Atlantic Ocean is 95 degrees. Even at the bottom.

[Anonymous No.16178427]

>>16177568
Ruralfag here. I remember it being hotter as a kid.

[Anonymous No.16178436]

>>16178427
You were a fat kid though.

[Anonymous No.16178459]

>>16178436
Everyone in Kentucky is fat.

[Anonymous No.16178467]

>>16178415

Yes? You can find past instances of all sorts of current buzzwords. Does this mean that they were common and/or their referents were considered coherent and/or real? No.

[Anonymous No.16178479]

>>16178467
Take your meds

[Anonymous No.16178482]

>>16178459
Exactly. I don't trust someone who regularly gets the meat sweats to tell me when it's hot outside.

[Anonymous No.16178494]

>>16177040
99% of the human population lives within 3 miles of the coast or a large river.

[Anonymous No.16178496]

>>16177561
Not a rebuttal

[Anonymous No.16178501]

>>16174003
>something must be attempted
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequences
Don't just do something, stand there!

[Anonymous No.16178918]

Wet bulb temperatures happen all the time in the south yet you don’t hear about thousands of people suddenly dying from it. Why’s that?

[Anonymous No.16178978]

>>16177809
There's not one good reason to believe the massive amount of cars, planes, factories and power plants we've produced hasn't had an effect on the climate you dense faggot.

[Anonymous No.16179009]

>>16178978
Yes, it's made plants very happy.

[Anonymous No.16179021]

>>16178978
That's not how evidence works. You have to prove that it DOES have an effect, you can't just assume it to be so. From what I can see, all the evidence points to the fact that the Earth goes through natural cycles of cooling and heating regardless of human activity.

[Anonymous No.16179206]

>>16173676
Holy cow, you are ignorant. This is not rare. I remember these days as far back as the 1990s you worthless zoomer. Go touch grass.

[Anonymous No.16179612]

>>16173288
>34.5c
>"OOHHH NOOOO, WE'RE ALL DOOMED AND WILL DIE INSTANTLY"
>meanwhile middle east exist

[Anonymous No.16179849]

>>16179206
Maybe if you live in Haiti. I was outside all the time in the 1990s and these conditions did not exist for the most part, and that includes when I would go to Florida.

[Anonymous No.16179854]

>>16179612
>He doesn't understand the difference between the temperature and the wet bulb temperature
Everyone point and laugh.

[Anonymous No.16179970]

>>16173288
>this is too spicy for Americans
Kek. And before some retard mentions anything, I know what a wet bulb temperature is.

[Anonymous No.16179992]

I will support any climate political candidate as long as he openly calls for a 95% reduction of the human population. That would achieve the carbon reduction. It has to be that way, i will oppose all climate initiatives unless they are a 90% reduction of the global population, not through murder but through some gradual process where you have to apply to be a parent and theres limited slots and they get auctioned, so only the top 10% rich get to have kids basically

[Anonymous No.16180008]

>>16179992
Lmao you can start from culling youself.

[Anonymous No.16180089]

>>16180008
How will a start a process of reducing total human reproduction through issuing permits for reproduction, by killing myself? That makes no sense. Killing myself would not start such a process.

[Anonymous No.16180160]

>>16174055
>sure, that's why we're working on nuclear fusion.
>cheap
Not in your lifetime.

[Anonymous No.16180162]

>>16180089
No, see, you're a hypocrite if you don't work against your ideological goals. I am very smart.

[Anonymous No.16181026]

>>16173288
Carbon fr got L rizz

[Anonymous No.16181715]

>>16180089
Have you seen dead people reproduce?

[Anonymous No.16181732]

>>16179849
You were less fat in the 1990s. Lose some weight and stop posting anecdotes like they're scientific facts.

[Anonymous No.16181781]

>>16181715
Non sequitur but, yes

[Anonymous No.16181786]

>>16173288
>without AC, you die

[Anonymous No.16181789]

>>16173288
>Why do Americans feel hotter and hotter every year?
It's a complete mystery but I'm betting it's due to not having a carbon tax.