Sentences with phrase «harming the people around»

This would help us to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, like dying oceans and widespread desertification, which will harm people around the world, especially the poor.

Lots more examples of people choosing to ruin their life and harming people around them.

Therefore, they carry that aggressive violent attitude into their daily lives, harming the people around themselves.

A strong ethical argument can be made that scientists who conclude that there is strong evidence that citizens in their country are harming people around the world and putting millions of others at risk have a duty to speak up.

(Athanasiou and Bear 2002) The 2oC upper temperature limit is quite controversial scientifically because, as we shall see, some scientists believe that lower amounts of additional warming could set into motion rapid climate changes that could greatly harm people around the world and increases of as little as 1oC will likely greatly harm some people in some regions.

While 41 % report that climate change is already harming people around the world, 29 % believe that it will not harm people for many years or may never harm people, the greatest sentiment of this kind in any nation polled.

While much of the current climate change debate focuses on curbing future carbon emissions, a median of 51 % across the nations surveyed believe that climate change is harming people around the world now.

Not exact matches

«Mr. Trump knew that this false, disparaging statement would be read by people around the world, as well as widely reported, and that Ms. Clifford would be subjected to threats of violence, economic harm, and reputational damage as a result.»

Here's hoping the new upgrade goes smoothly, and without harm to any of the 4.3 million people who rely on the New York subway system to get around.

«You can be that sheep who pushes their earbuds in and wanders around planning on being surrounded by nothing but flowers all day long, but the reality is people get mugged, kidnapped and harmed every day.

Jeffries: In Patrisse Cullors» memoir, When They Call You a Terrorist, she says the narrative around accountability is that harm to Black people is our own doing, whereas harm to White people results in a collective sympathy.

If atheists have any disdain for religion, it is because of all the harm religion does around the world and the inherent discrimination that we face every day by the likes of people, like you.

Gee, do you think a bunch crazy people running selling all of their possessions off and running around telling everyone the world is about to end all the while telling anyone who will listen, or not, that they are of a certain faith harms the reputation of that faith?

I am an athesit and do not think that I have the freedom to run around hacking people with a machete I try to help people whenever I can, do no harm if possible, and support those around me.

What is more evil / selfish: A person who inadvertently causes harm to many around him / her because they are so wrapped up in self they can not see / do not care about the pain they cause or someone who purposefully chooses to cause harm to one person because it brings them pleasure?

I find it helps to have people around me who I can trust to help me with this — where I have any blind spot with harm I might be causing to point that out in order to facilitate change or indeed when I have good that I bring that I have not been aware that I am doing.

The thought of facing a catastrophic storm, the inability to communicate with loved ones in harm's way, or even something as non-life threatening as an extra, ahem, interesting relative at the Thanksgiving dinner table made me realize how much I rely on the people around me to see me through times that pump cortisol into my system.

«Some 100 million people throughout the world are walking around having had scans before they were born, and there has never been a shred of evidence that it does any harm.

We were the only two people around the table who didn't drink alcohol and I remarked about that and he came back and said «thank you, I hadn't wanted to say it but I endorse that policy, how can we say that alcohol that causes untold harm — just look at domestic violence etc — if we think alcohol is that bad why don't we ban it?

It was probably this biologically inaccurate conception that led to the idea of «weasel words»: the notion of unpleasant, shifty, vermin - like creatures emanating from people's mouths, going around causing damage and harm to all and sundry.

And the only people they are harming are themselves, by not attending lectures and not getting the education they are paying for... oh and a few motorists who will be caught in the traffic chaos around the march.

Islam is one of the great world religions, which is practised freely, without any harm to anyone, by millions of people in this country and around the world.

If you don't get a job offer after an interview, what possible harm could there be in asking for advice from the people who interviewed you as to how you might improve your interviewing skills the next time around?

«A lot of the discussion on vitamin D has been around the potential benefits, but people should also be aware that there may be potential harms.»

Young people around the world have started suing their governments to take stronger action against climate change, claiming that they have «willfully ignored this impending harm» for too long.

Each year self - harm leads to around 150,000 attendances at hospital A&E departments and around one in 12 young people are thought to injure themselves intentionally at some point, according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, NICE.

However, as a work around for those people who think the pocket would harm the functionality, what about using velcro strips to attach the Kindle to the cover?

But I digress (something I seem to do a lot around you people), my point is do these dark, sexy covers do more harm than good for authors and readers alike.

Unfortunately there are sadistic people around who think it clever or cool to harm, torture or even kill cats, particularly cats that are black.

And crucially, churches in the U.S. have just begun to take up this issue in big numbers, which they see as a moral issue of not just protecting God's Creation, but also not inflicting direct harm on helpless people around the world.A new coalition of environmentalists, aid groups, and churches have been pivotal in changing the momentum for the new «Climate Security Act» co-sponsored by Senator John Warner.

Climate change not only threatens more people, animals, and ecological systems around the world than the Gulf spill; it promises to be a problem that will continually wreck havoc for centuries while harming the world's poorest and most vulnerable people with drought, floods, killer storms, rising sea levels, and vector borne disease.

The evidence for this widespread failure to understand the practical significance of seeing climate change as a moral issue includes the almost universal failure of the press or advocates of climate change policies to ask those governments, businesses, organizations, or individuals who oppose national climate change policies on the grounds of national economic cost alone whether they deny that in addition to national economic interest nations must comply with their obligations, duties, and responsibilities to prevent harm to millions of poor, vulnerable people around the world.

Although oil leaking from the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform site may in fact be creating the greatest environmental and economic harm in U.S. history so far, there is new evidence that another looming environmental problem is likely to produce far worse environmental and economic impacts not only for the United States but particularly for some of the poorest people around the world.

Do you agree that those nations and people around the world who will most be harmed by climate change have a right to participate in a decision by a nation that chooses to not adopt climate change policies because costs to it are deemed unacceptable?

Such a framing ignores that it is tens of millions of poor people around the world who will be most harmed by climate change if high - emitting nations fail to reduce their emissions to their fair share 0f safe global emissions.

This question is designed to expose the ethical conclusion that nations who are put on notice by the most prestigious and responsible scientific organizations in the world that ghg emissions from their jurisdictions are causing great harm to vulnerable people around the world have an ethical duty to accept the burden of proof to prove that their ghg emissions are not causing harm.

When you argue that a nation emitting high levels of ghgs need not adopt climate change policies because there is scientific uncertainty about adverse climate change impacts, are you arguing that a nation need not take action on climate change until scientific uncertainties are resolved given that waiting to resolve all scientific uncertainties before action is taken may very likely make it too late to prevent catastrophic climate change harms to millions of people around the world?

This is so because government officials, unlike ordinary citizens, have the power to prevent or minimize great harms to millions of people around the world that mainstream scientists have concluded that their constituents or governments that they represent are causing or contributing to.

«In fact, more people believe that preparation efforts will help the economy and create jobs around the U.S., in their state and in their town than think these efforts will harm the economy and result in fewer jobs in those areas.

Climate change is a problem that is being caused mostly by high emitting nations and people that are harming and putting at risk poor people and the ecological systems on which they depend around the world.

Although ordinary individuals may have no duty to go beyond their own personal opinion about the science of climate change, government officials who have the power to enact policies that could present catastrophic harm to millions of people around the world may not as a matter of ethics justify their refusal to support policies to reduce the threat of climate change on the basis of their uninformed opinions on climate science.

The evidence for this widespread failure to understand the practical significance of seeing climate change as a moral issue includes the almost universal failure of the press or advocates of climate change policies to ask businesses, organizations, or individuals who oppose national climate change policies on the grounds of economic cost alone, whether they deny that, in addition to economic interests, nations must comply with their obligations, duties, and responsibilities to prevent harm to millions of poor, vulnerable people around the world.

On a smaller scale, we have seen great harm done to poor people around the world by the conversion of maize from a food crop to an energy crop.

Because a high percentage of the arguments made by most proponents of climate change policy have been focused on adverse climate impacts that citizens will experience where they live, while ignoring the harms to hundreds of millions of vulnerable poor people around the world that are being affected by GHG emissions from all - high emitting nations, along with claims that mainstream climate science is credible and has been undermined by morally reprehensible tactics, there is a need to make more people aware of:

Even if rapid climate change is not triggered if the 2 °C warming is exceeded, this amount of warming will create huge harms to some people and nations around the world.

On what basis may the United States argue that it need not reduce US ghg emissions to its fair share of safe global missions because China or some other developing country has not yet adopted strong climate change policies, given that any US ghg emissions in excess of the US fair share of safe total omissions is harming hundreds of thousands of people around the world and the ecological systems on which life depends.

The personal harm from turbines is wide spread across Australia and around the World: the harm is well known to people who have an interest and CAN READ; as is the harm caused by the spiralling cost of electricity in Australia and around the world, as well.

So real costs are being imposed, based on theoretical costs to future (yet unborn) people halfway around the world, based on a guess of their supposed philosophy of life, and theortical harms which have not been demonstrated.

Dyson «we have seen great harm done to poor people around the world by the conversion of maize from a food crop to an energy crop.

«Trump knew that his false, disparaging statement would be read by people around the world, as well as widely reported, and that Ms. Clifford would be subjected to threats of violence, economic harm, and reputational damage as a result.»