As John Schellnhuber, one of the biggest European climate scientists that has been part of the majority of IPCCs, said last year about COP:

"Wenn die Länder die Klimaziele nicht umsetzen, sind diese Konferenzen nur Jahrmärkte der Eitelkeit."

Translation by Google:

"If countries do not implement the climate targets, these conferences will be nothing more than vanity fairs."

Interview, where he said it, and also said that 3 degrees above pre industrial would mean the end of ~~modern~~ human civilization (in German):

Youtube

Wait, wtf? Mouth dry! Mouth dry!

Who are these candidates with a "bold climate agenda"? I don't know any political party in any country, where I'd say 'they've got a bold climate agenda'.

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.

The second big change is that when you transition from one age to the next—there are three ages, Antiquity, Exploration, and Modern—you'll pick a new civilization to lead, one that was at the height of its power during the age in question. So you might go from controlling Rome in Antiquity to Mongolia during the Exploration age.

Well, I still play civ4 bts, never went beyond civ5 and unless I update my hardware probably won't try civ6 and civ7 anytime soon.

But what you mean, you'll change civilization midgame? I can't wrap my head around this concept. Or does your civilization simply change it's name?

Unfortunately my hardware is too old to play games that are like that.

But I've noticed the same with mobile games. My policy is: if that single player game doesn't start without internet access it gets deleted.

I thought it was because proper farming.

Like being able to support larger groups of people, where individuals could specialize in other things than hunting, gathering and whatever else was keeping the early humans busy.

On the other hand I've heard we've been possibly farming long before 10,000 BCE.

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

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.