You Too Can Now Wear A ‘Climate Change’ T-Shirt!

This is now a thing

Colour-changing T-shirt alerts wearers to the effects of climate change

Design studios The Unseen and The Lost Explorer have come together to create a T-shirt that changes colour when it comes into contact with polluted water.

The Unseen Explorer T-shirt, named after both the studios, was launched on World Environment Day on 5 June – less than a week after US President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the Paris climate agreement.

Designed to represent the effect that climate change has on ocean acidification, the T-shirt is coated in a natural cabbage dye that reacts to pollution in water – and changes colour depending on the pH levels. The designers hope it will help to spread awareness about climate change.

If you’re thinking “are they saying that the pH levels are pollution?”, well, yes, that is exactly what they are saying. Because that is all the t-shirt does: change color depending on the pH levels.

“[The project] is about using colour, clothing or material to give a language to something that’s deeper and bigger that most of us wouldn’t even understand when we look at facts and figures.”

It’s not easy to understand because the facts from the Cult of Climastrology are fungible. You never know what they will change from the past to prop up their beliefs.

“PH is an innate property of water, one that defines the limits within which life can and can’t thrive,” said the duo. “The T-shirt starts its life purple to indicate the purest form of neutral water.”

“When the T-shirt comes into contact with non-neutral water, the pH level of that water is then revealed through the colour of the garment, forming colour shifts through the pH scale from alkaline green to acidic red.”

The plain dye it yourself version is just $75! What a bargain! It doesn’t actually do anything, you have to go through a process to make it ‘carbon pollution’ color changing yourself.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

30 Responses to “You Too Can Now Wear A ‘Climate Change’ T-Shirt!”

  1. drowningpuppies says:

    Anyone dumb enough to buy this should also be required to buy another Tee for their friend, partner, or spouse… to send the message:

    I’M WITH STUPID—>

  2. Dana says:

    Judging by the picture, you have to be a [vintage term for a bundle of sticks] to wear it!

  3. Jeffery says:

    Judging by the picture

    And what do you judge from the picture?

    • Dana says:

      If you can’t see it, I can’t help you. Or, as Army recruiters used to say, most of the time you don’t have to ask to be able to tell.

  4. Jeffery says:

    Dana,

    What do you judge from the picture?

  5. Jeffery says:

    And Dana,

    When did you serve in the Army?

    • Dana says:

      Actually, I’m one of the few in my family who did not serve in the Armed Forces. When I took my military physical, as a volunteer, not a draftee, my right eye failed with what was then classified as a J-400, if I remember the term correctly; that was 1977. I was subject to the draft in 1972, but my lottery number was 264, and I was not called. By that time, President Nixon had ended sending draftees to Vietnam.

      My father and mother both served in Japan during the Korean War conflict, and both of my daughters are in the Army; one is enjoying daytime temperatures around 115º F.

    • drowningpuppies says:

      So when did the little cowardly guy serve, hmmm?

      • Jeffery says:

        Smegma,

        We didn’t claim to know what Army recruiters were thinking and said, another commenter did. We were trying to understand how that commenter knew what Army recruiters thought and said. Like him we volunteered for the Army; unlike him we volunteered during the Vietnam War. But you know all this but like trump, you continue to lie.

        When did you serve, Smegma?

        • Dana says:

          How is it that our oh-so-liberal commenter Jeffrey tries to slur another commenter by referring to something generated by the penis? Isn’t that homophobic?

          How old are you, Jeffrey? I turned 18 in 1971, and by then President Nixon’s “Vietnamization” program had dramatically reduced American participation in the war. Had I volunteered upon being graduated from high school, and passed the eye test — possible, since my vision had degraded between then and 1977 — it would have been early 1972 before I could have been sent to VN, and by then US participation had declined even further.

          • Jeffery says:

            Dana,

            We apologize if you were offended by Smegma. We occasionally slip and slur the dumbest commenter after his or her repeated slurs.

            Do you think Smegma is a worse slur than faggot? And you certainly have never objected the multiple slurs directed at us.

            We didn’t mean to imply that waiting until after the Vietnam War to volunteer for the Army made you less of a man. We had our own reasons for volunteering in 1972. We were rejected as were you.

          • Jeffery says:

            Dana,

            Smegma occurs in both men and women.

      • drowningpuppies says:

        You didn’t volunteer for the Army during the Vietnam war, little guy, and you didn’t serve.
        That’s already been proven and you’re a fucking liar.

        • Jeffery says:

          Smegma,

          When did you volunteer?

        • Dana says:

          If his statement that he volunteered in 1972 is correct, but that he failed the physical, it would technically have been during the Vietnam war, but so close to the end of it as to make it very unlikely he’d have been sent there had he been accepted. If that was when he was graduated from high school, he couldn’t have volunteered any sooner.

  6. Jeffery says:

    Dana,

    Let us accept your premise that the picture is of a man, not a young woman. Let us further accept your cowardly characterization that the young man is gay. So what?

    Why are pseudo-masculine “tough guy” cons like you so afraid of homosexual men? Your picture is available online and based on looks alone we suspect you have little to worry about from homosexual men OR straight women. And that’s before they got to know you.

    • Dana says:

      Well, at least one normal woman has put up with me for 38 years and 22 days; that’s pretty much all I need.

      You seem to think that because normal men mock homosexuals, they must be afraid of them; those two things are not the same.

      • Jeffery says:

        We’ll take your word for it regarding your marriage.

        So if not fear, what is the basis for the hostility Cons express toward gay men? Is it religious?

        • Dana says:

          You grew up male, I suppose: surely you remember how weaklings and effeminate boys were mocked and bullied, as males competed for dominance. That’s what boys, and then men, do. Religion might play a part for some, but simple, normal male behavior leads to competition, and the weak and the effeminate lose out.

          • Jeffery says:

            So, the ignorance defense. Got it. Is this why Con men consider themselves superior to women? This would also explain Con men’s fear of physically superior Black men and why they favor their oppression. Also, if Con men are physically superior why do they need so many guns?

  7. JGlanton says:

    I don’t know if you have to be a vintage term for a bundle of sticks, but it looks like the models all learned to pose by imitating the Obama/Mao/Lenin arrogant holier-than-thou big snob pose.

  8. Dana says:

    It isn’t ignorant to compete, Jeffrey: that’s normal behavior.

    Why own a weapon if you are physically strong? That’s easy: outside of sports, a rational man doesn’t want a fair fight, but wants to win, whatever that takes. As Al Davis once said, if you ain’t cheatin’, you ain’t tryin’! If someone comes at you with a knife, and you have both a knife and a gun, you’re a fool if you don’t use the gun.

  9. Dana says:

    Why do men compete? We compete for women! Homosexual males lose out because they don’t compete!

    • Jeffery says:

      Dana,

      So you think homosexual men would prefer to be with women? LOL.

      What is your evidence that homosexual men “can’t compete”? Partnered gay men earn significantly more than traditionally married men.

      Also, you have changed the subject from mocking and ridiculing those you believe are gay to competition. What do you mean by competing? Arm wrestling? Dancing? Foot races? Singing? Caber tossing? Chain sawing? Income? Target shooting? Speed reading? Math? IQ? Hitting a golf ball? Field dressing a deer?

      Actually, Con Men are insecure and always need someone to mock and ridicule. Blacks, Mexicans, disabled, women, homosexuals, Muslims and on and on. Hence, trump. Con Men like big trucks and guns because they feel inadequate. Con Men like to control female reproductive behavior because they’re afraid of losing their women to a better man.

  10. Nate says:

    Long time ago, they had shirts kinda like that that changed color in response to body heat.

    When women wore them on hot days, things got rather … interesting.

  11. Jeffery says:

    Dana,

    Insecure men have always bullied those they perceive as weaker. Obviously, not all “slight” or “frail” boys are gay. Some are ill, some are just slight. Most boys mature into men who do not mock and ridicule those they judge as weak, ill or just different. In fact, we try to discourage that immature behavior as our sons mature. Yet, in Con Man circles bullying is admired. Hence, trump.

    But then the New Con Men view health insurance as effeminate and believe the weak, frail and sick should just die.

    In our experience, most “normal” women do not view cruelty and bullying as masculine traits. Do you mock and ridicule gay men or those you think are gay in front of your so-called “normal” woman? How does she respond to your cruel behavior? Or do you hide this side of yourself?

    • Jeffery says:

      I remember hearing:

      When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

      That would include putting away bullying those you consider weak.

      • Dana says:

        To the weakling left and other Special Snowflakesâ„¢, simply competing and winning is seen as bullying.

        We already know that physically weaker men are more likely to be socialists; those who lose out in competition are more likely to want to use the police power of the state to secure for themselves what they are unable to win on their own.

Bad Behavior has blocked 10553 access attempts in the last 7 days.