• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Would you rather burn to death or freeze to death?

Would you rather burn to death or freeze to death?


  • Total voters
    112
Freeze, for sure. I love the cold weather and just being cold. I hate humidity and hotness. I hate heat.
 

Lunar1008

Member
Burn to death; it'd be quicker probably, and honestly I hate the cold.
 

Archangel Azazel

Fallen Angel
Freeze to death.. Burn would be too much pain and with cold you will go numb and.. die.
 

JennaJayfeather

Gangrenous Creature
I'd say burn to death. Sure, it'd be painful, but it'd be a quick painful. With freezing to death you'd have to sit and be uncomfortable and wait for your internal organs to shut down. That, and I hate the cold. XD
 

usernames

Active Member
I wish i could choose neither, but i'd say freeze. Freezing is not painful, but still sad. Also, it'll make me feel Ash's pain for once. BUT I WANNA CHOOSE NEITHER! YOU GOT THAT?
 

Dragonicwari

Artistically angry
I'd rather burn to death; if you can breathe in enough carbon dioxide from the smoke fast enough you'll go unconscious and don't have to endure the pain
 

Skydra

Well-Known Member
Great, I get to choose between two options, both involving intense discomfort of extreme temperature conditions. Why choose? They're basically the same thing.
 

Gelatino95

Not a tool
Great, I get to choose between two options, both involving intense discomfort of extreme temperature conditions. Why choose? They're basically the same thing.

People always miss the point

There is a difference

If both options involve your death, then why don't you focus your attention on what happens after your death

If you burn to death, your body is lost forever

If you freeze to death, your body is still intact, so you still have a chance to leave a legacy in the world using your own body

Make a funny face. Strike a seductive pose. Express yourself any way you want. When you freeze to death, you could be stuck like that forever.
 

JX Valentine

Ever-Discordant
People always miss the point

There is a difference

If both options involve your death, then why don't you focus your attention on what happens after your death

If you burn to death, your body is lost forever

If you freeze to death, your body is still intact, so you still have a chance to leave a legacy in the world using your own body

Make a funny face. Strike a seductive pose. Express yourself any way you want. When you freeze to death, you could be stuck like that forever.

Sorry to butt in, but that's not really how frostbite and burns work. When you're injured with heat, you're not burning the same way paper or wood does. All you're doing is cooking yourself. There's deep tissue burns that could seep all the way down beneath the skin and affect the internal organs. If it's not treated, then you die... because your injuries have gone septic.

Meanwhile, when you freeze, you're not freezing your body like a human popsicle. You're... doing the exact same thing. Frostbite happens exactly like a burn in many ways. You damage the tissue, and the damage seeps all the way down to affect your organs. More likely, though, you're actually going to die of the aftereffect: the part where the gangrene hits your organs. In fact, the fun thing about being frozen is that if you survive the hypothermia but fail to get medical attention ASAP, your body parts will fall off thanks to the gangrene, so you won't even really be stuck like that forever. Really, it's probably not even remotely the prettiest death.

Alternatively, you die of hypo- or hyperthermia first, and at that point, the effect is still pretty much the same.

But yeah, either way, both burn and freeze victims leave behind bodies, and they'll probably be in very similar states because what extreme temperatures do to the human body are actually not that different. The only difference, really, is that burns tend to happen on the contact point, whereas thanks to the way the circulation system works, frostbite will happen first on your extremities. Assuming, of course, we're not saying you decided to take a bath in liquid nitrogen or something creative like that.

That being said, to answer the poll, it's a tough one. On the one hand, being burned to death is pretty much a faster way to go (depending, of course, on the method we're talking about here, given how fast that liquid nitrogen bath could be). On the other, that also means that if someone could come along and save me, they could if I'm being frozen to death. Not to mention there's more ways to survive the situations in which you'd die of cold than there are ways to survive dying of heat. (Stuck outside in subzero temperatures? Keep moving. Soaked and in the same situation? Get a fire going.) So, yeah, probably the cold.

(And this tl;dr post was brought to you by "science is pretty ****ing awesome." And the letter Q.)
 
Last edited:

Gelatino95

Not a tool
Sorry to butt in, but that's not really how frostbite and burns work. When you're injured with heat, you're not burning the same way paper or wood does. All you're doing is cooking yourself. There's deep tissue burns that could seep all the way down beneath the skin and affect the internal organs. If it's not treated, then you die... because your injuries have gone septic.

Meanwhile, when you freeze, you're not freezing your body like a human popsicle. You're... doing the exact same thing. Frostbite happens exactly like a burn in many ways. You damage the tissue, and the damage seeps all the way down to affect your organs. More likely, though, you're actually going to die of the aftereffect: the part where the gangrene hits your organs. In fact, the fun thing about being frozen is that if you survive the hypothermia but fail to get medical attention ASAP, your body parts will fall off thanks to the gangrene, so you won't even really be stuck like that forever. Really, it's probably not even remotely the prettiest death.

Alternatively, you die of hypo- or hyperthermia first, and at that point, the effect is still pretty much the same.

But yeah, either way, both burn and freeze victims leave behind bodies, and they'll probably be in very similar states because what extreme temperatures do to the human body are actually not that different. The only difference, really, is that burns tend to happen on the contact point, whereas thanks to the way the circulation system works, frostbite will happen first on your extremities. Assuming, of course, we're not saying you decided to take a bath in liquid nitrogen or something creative like that.

That being said, to answer the poll, it's a tough one. On the one hand, being burned to death is pretty much a faster way to go (depending, of course, on the method we're talking about here, given how fast that liquid nitrogen bath could be). On the other, that also means that if someone could come along and save me, they could if I'm being frozen to death. Not to mention there's more ways to survive the situations in which you'd die of cold than there are ways to survive dying of heat. (Stuck outside in subzero temperatures? Keep moving. Soaked and in the same situation? Get a fire going.) So, yeah, probably the cold.

(And this tl;dr post was brought to you by "science is pretty ****ing awesome." And the letter Q.)

I always imagined it as "fall in a volcano" or "freeze in a block of ice"

I am a man of science as well, but this poll does leave quite a bit of room for interpretation
 

JX Valentine

Ever-Discordant
I always imagined it as "fall in a volcano" or "freeze in a block of ice"

Ooh, in that case, we should totally talk about how that would work. I mean, yeah, if you fall in a volcano, there's nothing that anyone would be getting back, sure. But you've got to be in pretty specific circumstances to be frozen in a block of ice. Sure, someone would be able to get parts of you back in that scenario (as opposed to falling in a volcano), but to get frozen in a block of ice, I'm not sure you'd want to have parts of you retrieved because that would probably mean you were stupid enough to let yourself get frozen over anyway. I don't think there's that many conditions where you'd be able to do that before things fall off you first.

'Course, either one would be rather humiliating. The volcano death would just mean you were stupid enough to wander that close to the peak of an active volcano unless we're actually saying that the volcano was erupting, and you just happened to be caught in some of the lava flow. If that's the case, then that would actually be less of a humiliating death, and there would be some part of you preserved, depending on the type of flow we're talking about here. (Yay for things you learn from Pompeii?)

Tl;dr, if it's volcano vs. block of ice, that's actually a trickier question to answer, come to think of it. You'd have to be extremely specific there. I'd personally like to have a mold of me made Pompeii-style than actually being frozen in a block of ice because dying by the former would be quick, unpredictable, and actually pretty awesome, rather than slow and the kind of thing that would mark me as totally deserving of it. But if we're talking about falling into an actual volcano that isn't really erupting vs. freezing in a block of ice... that's a different story.
 
Top