sinkingship

As always I will keep reading about every year's COP. However, by now my expectation is, that there won't be much, if anything at all, that I need to know about the COP.

Aren't these changes, because there are just have bones to look at, so skin properties etc are a guessing game?

But how did that jaw bone double in length in 2001? Was the skull a missing part until then?

Thank you, I didn't consider that he himself could have politicized sexuality first.

In that case it sounds more like a "rules for thee, but not for me" thing, which makes perfectly sense to point out!

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.

As I understood it, the dashed line is just the 35°C wet bulb temperature line.

I think it's the "old assumed border of survivability" and don't know if it is based solely on mathematics or on other experiments as well.

I also don't know on how many individuals the new line is based and what age group the older people one is.

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.

Uh, damn! I had the impression that a lot of governments around the world rely on the theory that talk is enough!

That makes sense, I guess. Like to choose a skillset for the next epoch, if you're right. That sounds kinda cool. Almost like a skill tree for your civ, only that it comes with a civ name change.

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?

If it had a stable orbit before and then slowed down, I thought it'll get a more elliptical orbit, being both closer and further, or fall into Earth.

My logic was that a stable orbit closer to the center needs higher speeds to counter higher gravity and vice versa.

So if the moon would get hit in a way that makes it slow down and get pushed further away from Earth at the same time, it could keep a roundish orbit, or not?

What's with that specific timeframe? Is it due to the orbit never being perfect? Or random slight influences from other not too far, heavy objects?

Thanks for the explanation, the moon being a little fast for it's orbit and therefore slowly spiraling out of Earths gravity makes sense to me now.

It would not, though. I assume your glasses to have a larger surface than your eyes. Additionally, eyelash do are real good job in filtering the air in front of your eye.

Source: was wearing glasses for 25 years before I got my eyes fixed 7 years ago.

I know you're right, have read it elsewhere before. But I can't figure out why that would happen. I doubt Earth is loosing mass. Does the moon slow down over time due to impacts or what causes this?