Climate hysteria, "wet bulb temperature," and the rise of the idiot intellectual
· Jul 26, 2023 ·

As far as I can recall, I had never heard of a "wet bulb temperature" prior to maybe 72 hours ago, and yet it has suddenly become the phrase du jour among our self-appointed betters.

They assume you don't know what it means and so it's a perfect mechanism to buttress their fragile egos (which are always moments away from complete collapse).

Of course, they have no idea what it means either, but that's not the point. They don't feel it necessary to actually know the meaning of the words they use, only that they know how to drop them in a sentence that supports the favored narrative of their peers.

When you combine this kind of performative pantomime of intelligence with the political imperative of consolidating power, you get truly comical outcomes when they are exposed. They know, deep down inside, that they're frauds. So like the Wizard of Oz, they frantically flail about in a vain attempt to preserve what little is left of the illusion after Dorothy finally pulls back the curtain.

With that in mind, permit me to introduce you to Brynn Tannehill, author, think-tank analyst, "trans woman," former aviator in the Navy (thank you for your service) and full-on hysterical unhinged lefty nutcase with a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Perhaps "hysterical unhinged lefty nutcase" may be going too far.

But, probably not.

Tannehill's latest book starts with his prattling on about how he wrote a term paper in college about the Weimar Republic or something and then starts in with this:

Then in 2015, Trump ran for office. Like most Americans, I initially treated it like a joke.

"Like most Americans... I know..." is what he meant to write.

I thought the Republican Party (GOP) was committing suicide, and that this was the last gasp of the Tea Party.

CNN thought that too. Pretty much all the liberaltariat thought that. It's one of the many hazards of bubble-think: the inability to see, or even be remotely curious about, what those outside your professional and social bubble might be thinking.

But then something he said during his speeches pricked up my ears. Trump kept repeating the phrase, "One people, under one God, saluting one flag." I had heard this phrase before, but it wasn't in English.

This was way too close to the models of both the Second and Third Reich for my comfort: "Ein Reich. Ein Volk. Ein Gott." (One Nation. One People. One God.), and "Ein Reich. Ein Volk, Ein Führer!"

Three paragraphs into the book and he's already gone full Godwin.

This is when I hit the panic button when few others were.

He is proud of the fact that he was way ahead of the curve on mental illness.

And yet, I, too, feel as if I've heard that kind of formulation before. Oh yeah, now I remember..

"…one nation, under God, indivisible…."

The Pledge of Allegiance was written by Hitler!!!!!!!!!

With all that in mind, let's examine a recent tweet made by Tannehil which exhibits the same kind of calm intellect and sober, fact-based analysis.

People don't understand the impact of climate change.

No, they don't, and you're here to prove it, just not in the way you had intended.

Take a look at this map.

Anything above 90 degrees F means that outdoor activity is likely to be deadly.

Oh no!

95+, and you cannot survive outdoors, even if you're in the shade doing NOTHING.


You're sitting in the shade, minding your own business, and because someone just had to have an SUV, you slump over dead on the spot.

And now that I'm thinking about it, it's 95 degrees Fahrenheit he's talking about. That would be Prussian scientist Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit!

He was quickly ridiculed, of course, with people noting that they have indeed personally survived 95+ days, including the entire states of Texas, Arizona, and Florida among others. Basically, everyone south of Chicago.

Ah, but he anticipated this; in fact, he invited it. Oh yes, time to bring out the big brain and show these yahoos who's the smart one:

For all those who think they're dunking on me, the chart states that it's wet bulb temperature.

There it is! "Wet bulb temperature." Now these rubes are in for it.

So what is wet bulb temperature?

The wet-bulb temperature (WBT) is the temperature read by a thermometer covered in water-soaked (water at ambient temperature) cloth (a wet-bulb thermometer) over which air is passed.

Okay, that sounds really... not helpful.

But wait, there's more.

The wet-bulb temperature is the lowest temperature that can be reached under current ambient conditions by the evaporation of water only.

Even heat-adapted people cannot carry out normal outdoor activities past a wet-bulb temperature of 32 °C (90 °F), equivalent to a heat index of 55 °C (131 °F). A reading of 35 °C (95 °F) - equivalent to a heat index of 71 °C (160 °F) - is considered the theoretical human survivability limit for up to six hours of exposure.

See now why he was so excited? He had a map showing wet bulb temperatures in the 90s, meaning equivalent temperatures of 131 to 160 degrees Fahrenheit!!!!!


Only one little problem.

The map he used did not depict wet bulb temperatures. It depicted wet bulb globe temperatures, or WBGT.

This was helpfully pointed out to him.

Except that it clearly doesn't say that.

No, it clearly does not, at least not to anyone who bothered to take a moment to consider that maybe they aren't the natural genius they think they are.

Speaking of which, one commenter decided to sweep in to the rescue but skipped the whole "reading" part because reading sounds hard.

Did you...

Note the dramatic pause. He is relishing this moment, letting the warm wash of superiority wash over him for just a moment...

...did you post a picture of the chart in question with the term 'Wet Bulb' circled, then opine that it doesn't say 'Wet Bulb'?

I know some people are separated from reality, but this is an extreme case, I think.

I know some people are separated from basic reading comprehension, but this is an extreme case, I think.

KC-10 Driver responded more kindly than I probably would have.

Look closely.

Does it say "Wet Bulb Temperature" or "Wet Bulb Globe Temperature".

The guy came back, desperate to save face.

Turns out, it's a difference without meaning. Lethal WBGT is still 95 F. So the chart is still valid for this discussion.

Nope, that is still completely wrong.

The exchange went on like that for a while with others chiming in.

The guy just couldn't bear to take the L. It would shatter his world.

So what is Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT)?

Basically a slightly better version of the Heat Index meaning 95 degrees does not equal 160 degrees, it means you will be really hot if you are standing in direct sunlight (heat indexes tend to focus on how it feels in the shade).

It's the difference between your being really hot and really dead.

Think of wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) as the new, better heat index or "feels like" temperature. It more holistically measures heat stress on the body by answering: how efficiently can your body produce sweat to cool itself down?

Wet bulb temperature ("wet bulb" for short) represents the lowest temperature that air can reach through water evaporation alone. It is measured by covering a temperature sensor with a wet cloth. Think of a wet bathing suit - the dry air causes the water to evaporate and release heat, making you feel cold.

What's the distinction?

If you hear someone mention "wet bulb" in the context of heat, they are probably talking about WBGT.

On the other hand, wet bulb temperature - not WBGT - is more frequently associated with cold-related activities, such as snowmaking and cooling towers.

How could Tannehill have possibly known that?

Well, for one he could have bothered to read the warning at the top of the Wiki page he himself linked to to support his position.

Not to be confused with Wet-bulb globe temperature.

This commenter summed it up nicely.

It was like watching a person drowning in three feet of water. For goodness sake, just stand up.

He did delete it, incidentally, but not the thread he had created as part of it.

It is an hysterical diatribe based on a false premise in order to push a political agenda.

He ended it with this.

I admit this is a bit far afield of my usual messaging, and I'm not a climatologist.

Probably should have started with this, taken a moment, and just stopped right there.

As far as I can tell, he has been silent on this issue, and the tweet, for the past two days.

Ready to join the conversation? Subscribe today.

Access comments and our fully-featured social platform.

Sign up Now
App screenshot

You must signup or login to view or post comments on this article.