Sentences with phrase «debate about making changes»

DeFrancisco said he thinks it's «healthy» for the state GOP to have a debate about making changes in advance of a crucial election year.

Common New Year's resolutions include losing weight, feeling great, or once and for all ending the debate about making a change, be it in a job or relationship.

Not exact matches

Mike i have been thinking hard on this subject i hope you do nt leave the forum as i think we will get into a good debate / discussion the Lord has shown me alot of insight into this subject that i hadnt even thought about until Jeremy proposed his point of view.The word say iron sharpens iron we need to understand what we believe not just walk away because we feel it is treading on our beliefs because they change as we learn and understand because we have believed something for a long time does nt make it right.Use this opportunity to grow to learn and to understand what the Lord is wanting us to know if we cant do this as brothers how are we supposed to do it with unbelievers.brentnz

ACCC Chairman, Rod Sims has addressed the RBB Economics Conference in Sydney backing competition reforms proposed by the Harper Review Panel - three points were highlighted: (1) need to make a choice about s 46 - clearly preferencing a change to an SLC approach; (2) need to extend the Act to cover more government activities; (3) need to debate and decide the issues around competition advocacy and market studies.

On Tuesday, Taylor walked onto the chamber floor at 5:52 p.m., as Keith Wright and Al Graf entered the third hour of racially tinged debate about criminal justice issues and changes that should be made after the fatal arrest of Eric Garner.

Professor Bruce Fitt, professor of plant pathology at the University of Hertfordshire's School of Medical and Life Sciences, said: «There is considerable debate about the impact of climate change on crop production — and making sure that we have sufficient food to feed the ever - growing global population is key to our future food security.»

This fan translation comes amidst an ongoing debate about changes — tiny to some, bigger to others — made to several Japanese games with content that sexualizes young girls.

On the oldest radio station DZRH, the Climate Education Week Broadcast Program begins with poetic traditional debate about man - made pollution causing climate change written by Professor Tomas Ongoco, in cooperation with Alpha Phi Beta Fraternity featuring former senators, now Manila Hotel President Joey Lina, and Climate Change Commissioner Heherson Alchange written by Professor Tomas Ongoco, in cooperation with Alpha Phi Beta Fraternity featuring former senators, now Manila Hotel President Joey Lina, and Climate Change Commissioner Heherson AlChange Commissioner Heherson Alvarez.

LCN design was about taking those sorts of debates down into schools and communities so that teachers, students and families could think carefully about the changes they were thinking about making.

«It's really a debate about social change and how to exist and perhaps make change in a racially hierarchical society.»

Our plan is grounded in the following two premises: 1) When purposefully synchronized with one another across multiple forms of media («cross-media»), children's and adolescents» exposure to high quality youth - oriented social and ethical story content, i.e. stories of substance specifically about character development, compassion, and courage (CCC), is a powerful way to promote youth academic achievement and ethical values; 2) Especially if these stories, told and «read» across media, in their various genres (human interest, biography, history and historical fiction, civic engagement, coming of age, social change, spiritual awakening, moral issues, etc.), are «taught» by «educators» (broadly defined) using an «evidence - based» pedagogy that A) makes use of peer to peer, and adult facilitated group discussion and debate as a primary form of instruction, and B) takes advantage of access to the texts of the story that are made available cross-media (narratives, scripts, videos, etc.) to foster students» critical thinking and ethical reflection skills.

Folks should know that one of the primary sources Michael relies upon is Max Eden's research which I've debunked elsewhere, and who most recently has in my opinion been making outlandish and exploitive statements about the school shootings, in part to change the framework away from a gun control debate as he describes starting around the 13:50 mark.

At least in opening up such a debate, education ministers will feel that they are easing back into more reassuring waters, making decisions about change rather than fire - fighting problems.

Toyota Australia's design chief Nicolas Hogios said his Australian design team engaged in enthusiastic debate about the extent to which they should make changes to the 86 coupe, eventually remodelling only the rear quarter and roof.

For years the debate over fuel economy has been about making cars smaller and lighter, changes that could put people at greater risk of dying or being injured in crashes.

The dramatic change to the publishing landscape brought about by the mushrooming of self - publishing has led to concerns, with the editor of publishing news site Good e-Reader, Michael Kozlowski, saying there needs to be a debate around what constitutes being an author, because «calling everyone authors who put words on a document and submits them to the public devalues the word so much, it makes it meaningless».

So be up - front about money and look for opportunities to talk about your views of it, such as when you pay your bills, when you debate whether to make a purchase, when you put together the household budget, even when you get a raise or consider whether to change jobs.

While I'm still pretty upset, I guess Cookie is officially now the guard dog to the estate — which is semi-appropriate as I actually wanted to do a doghouse with a dog (who I was debating on making pink) on the right side of the Pink Carpet I have — ended up changing my mind about it though.

But lately, there have been a lot of debates about whether or not climate change is a man - made event or if it is even a real concern.

That illustrates my point, which is that present changes in surface temperature is not a good indicator of what we should expect in the future, and as such, it is not a great idea to make the debate about the observed ocean temperature.

As you might expect in a debate about whether or not the U.S. should make a risky move to perpetuate the use of fossil fuels, some committee members took the opportunity to voice doubt that the constant burning of that energy source was behind the rising temperatures, melting ice sheets, and abnormal weather events most scientists associate with climate change.

(It makes sense to debate what to do about climate change, but the fact of it has been thoroughly established.)

«[The subjects raised] made for a decent scientific debate 15 years ago, but the questions have since been settled... The Great Global Warming Swindle raised old debates that are going to be latched on to and used to suggest that we don't need to do anything about climate change.

In no way do my values suggest that debate should be curtailed: I merely insist that a scientific debate should take place in the scientific literature and that the public be put in a position where it can make an informed judgment about the voices that are opposing mainstream science on crucial issues ranging from climate change to vaccination.

The AGW true believers apparently have, by their sad reaction to Gleick's failings, helped Gleick make some more very poor decisions: «Gleick's lawyer John Keker, «Heartland no doubt will seek to exploit Dr. Gleick's admitted lapse in judgement in order to further its agenda in the ongoing debate about climate change, but if it wants to pursue this matter legally, it will learn that our legal system provides for a level playing field.»

Even the project's leader didn't seem to be making consistent statements about what his research meant for the climate change debate.

«James Hoggan's Climate Cover - Up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming is a valuable expose of the efforts that have been made by self - interested actors to prevent political action on climate change, by manipulating the public debate and confusing people about the strength of the science....

So hey, let's have a debate about whether the earth goes around the sun — there seems to be more honest disagreement with that than there is over man made global climate change.

Titled «Why Scientists Disagree about Global Warming,» it suggests that probably the most widely repeated claim in the global warming debate is that 97 percent of scientists agree that climate change is man - made and dangerous.

To my mind, the only change that will come about from these discussions / debates, and which make the quest for truth so important, is that people whose minds are not already made up and who will take one side or the other, according to their understanding and the strength of the argument as they perceive it, will vote for whom to elect to represent their point of view in government.

This collegiate grassroots campaign is meant to increase awareness about climate change issues, and give college students the facts they need to intelligently debate man made global warming advocates.»

But the debate is not well served by «denying» that the GHE itself is real, or by making absurd and obviously incorrect statements about trace gases not being able to help the Earth maintain its surface temperature well above its greybody value, or make irrelevant statements about «cold being unable to heat hot» (which is not what happens) or simply incorrect statements about the first or second law of thermodynamics somehow being violated by the GHE (which is absolutely trivial to demonstrate as purely false and silly besides, by doing a (gasp) actual computation of the entropy changes).

The UK's silent consensus to talk about climate — at some later date — simply means those choices will be made without debate, as though huge changes to our infrastructure, buildings, equipment, behaviours and food system can be delivered by a few technocrats working under the radar.

In announcing the change, President Obama emphasized the need to «make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology,» yet the new policy, as well as the language that the president used to explain it, underscores that the stem cell debate is in important ways not about scientific facts at all, but about the difficulty of balancing competing moral preferences.

«demands for urgent action to mitigate climate change thrive at the expense of genuine, illuminating, nuanced debate about how to make the best of an uncertain future.»

The phrase «global warming» has been thrown about so much, in the ongoing debate over dangers of man - made climate change, that it can seem more like a dark shadow on the horizon, than an imminent threat.

Of the myriad of claims made in the climate debate, Cox thinks it is sufficient to answer even the IPCC's own statement that «Uncertainties about future vulnerability, exposure, and responses of interlinked human and natural systems are large» with the mantra, «climate change is happening», which means precisely nothing.

Needless to say this has been deeply disturbing to an «ordinary Joe» (with 5 grandchildren) who has made an effort to understand the science and the politics that underlie the climate change «debate», especially since my country has become such an important player in the fossil fuel business with its tarsands and pipeline industries that affect us all, so I've tried to find out more about Judith Curry's recent contributions to the debate, not so much the hair - splitting, angels on the head of a pin, esoteric dissections of graphs and stats that I see here on your website but the ethical stance that you take on the larger issue of «killing» the IPCC and all it represents.

It was prepared to present the key issues discussed by the experts and to make their insights available to a broader audience, as part of UNCTAD's contribution to the debate about appropriate action to address the challenge of climate change.

The debate will continue because people like you don't understand what the debate is about (you seem to think it's about whether or not climate change is happening), and because people like you are making a crisis out of nothing.

... And that lax attitude towards method was borrowed by others hoping to intervene in the climate debate, to make statements about climate change «deniers».

To not respond to a request for that information would seem to be hiding behind the letter of FOIA rules (we shall see what the IC says), rather than responding in its spirit; if the information exists at all, it is surely in the public interest for it to be made public, to improve the quality of the debate about climate change policy.

Republicans should «continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate» because otherwise, he warned, «[s] hould the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly.»

The polarized and politicized nature of the societal debate about climate change can make it challenging for teachers to present the science honestly, accurately, and completely.

This matters because the climate change debate has been hi - jacked, emissions made worse by the net effects of renewables for a fast lobbyist buck in fact, driven by ignorance and misleading attacks that lump clean low carbon gas with dirty high carbon coal, and old school anti-nuclear activists who oppose nuclear generation on factualy spurious grounds, while it is in physics and engineering fact by far the best solution on any measure, through promoting irrational fear unsupported in any area of the facts and proven physics they deceive the unknowing about with simply false or msleading «sience».

Two reasons drove this conclusion: (1) the belief that a separate course would provide a better framework for teaching analysis and writing; and (2) a concern about the practical implications of making the combined course structure work together with the other big change brought by the 2000 curricular review — consolidated, one - semester versions of most first - year courses.24 The proposed changes to the writing program generated quite a bit of debate, 25 and its ultimate approval came with an agreement that the new courses would be evaluated after a few years.

There is debate about the level of fungibility that bitcoin has but since bitcoin is an open - source software, the network is constantly looking for ways to change this to make bitcoin even better.

MPs should make sure they have a toothbrush and a few changes of clothes handy because they can expect some long nights debating their response to the anticipated sheaf of hostile Lords amendments to the EU Withdrawal Bill, and determined attempts to stick requirements about a customs union into the Customs Bill, which is due back before them for report stage consideration.