Sentences with phrase «people seeing climate change»

Compared to the 2008 poll, the percentage of people seeing climate change as something people can control fell by 10 percent to 41 percent.

People saw climate change through the filter of their world - views about how nature works, what makes for a fair society, and so forth, views that they had developed since childhood.

I amazes me how many otherwise reasonable people see climate change this way.

It makes it clear that people see climate change as some vague threat, rather than relating it to any specific impact that they can see.

Not exact matches

Instead of a world dominated by renewable sources of power like wind and solar — as people concerned about the dangers of climate change would hope — PE execs see gas, oil and even coal as a substantial component of electricity and fuel sources in 2039, according to recent interviews conducted by CNBC.com on the future of energy as part of CNBC's 25th anniversary.

«We seeing the impact of a changing climate as a result of those emissions on the very poorest people.»

«I see the effects climate change is having on the poorest people in the world every day.

People like Latimer if you want modern day sewers, you believe in climate change, you see all the empty office space in Westchester, and realize that Astorino has not brought one single company to Westchester.

I'd really like to see sources to people saying that there is no climate change.

Labour's Shadow Secretary of State for International Trade, and for Climate Change, Barry Gardiner recently told the BBC's Daily Politics «we have to make sure that those people who are in this country illegally are removed from this country... I'm very happy to see a target of the number of those people that we want to remove».

This phenomenon is also seen for other emotive subjects such as climate change and vaccination, where some people reject the scientific consensus despite the large body of evidence supporting it.

Many people see heat as more of an annoyance than a threat, but climate change, extreme heat and human health are entwined.

Anticipated changes in the environment due to climate change may lead to mass migrations of people on a scale never before seen.

We see that in a lot of ways: Families deciding not to have their kids vaccinated; federally - funded R&D was half of what is was 50 years ago; people are denying climate change when the evidence is right in front of them; and so on.

To find out how people are experiencing climate change, Warner, van der Geest and their colleagues went to nine countries in Asia, Africa and Micronesia, surveyed 3269 households, and conducted 100 focus groups and interviews (see «Voices from the front lines «-RRB-.

«Though poorer countries in hotter regions are most vulnerable to climate change, our findings highlight the extent to which countries are interlinked, and Europe will see increasing numbers of desperate people fleeing their home countries.»

«In many of the specifics of the way people view climate change — for instance, seeing it as a moral issue and understanding that climate change is going to hurt people in developing countries and the world's poor the most — we saw really large shifts.»

So it argues that we must learn to cope with diverse climate shifts (see «How to survive climate change, from the people doing it «-RRB-.

And those five problems are climate change, petro - dictatorship — the rise of Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela — energy and natural resource supply, and demand constraints, and we see that from food to fuel today, biodiversity loss, the fact that we are right now in the middle of the sixth great extinction phase in the Earth's history that we know of; and finally something I call energy poverty, the 1.6 billion people on the planet we [who] still have no on - off switch in their life because they've no direct grid electricity.

Such a transition has been made possible by the convergence of several factors: a stream of new science showing an accelerating pace of climate change and its impacts; the everyday experience of people witnessing the change around them (and seeing it on the evening news); the compelling portrayals of what is happening and why, such as Al Gore's documentary An Inconvenient Truth and the 2007 reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; and the shifting stances of constituencies as diverse as evangelical Christians (who argue for protecting the climate on grounds of stewardship of God's creation) and military leaders (who argue on grounds of national secclimate change and its impacts; the everyday experience of people witnessing the change around them (and seeing it on the evening news); the compelling portrayals of what is happening and why, such as Al Gore's documentary An Inconvenient Truth and the 2007 reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; and the shifting stances of constituencies as diverse as evangelical Christians (who argue for protecting the climate on grounds of stewardship of God's creation) and military leaders (who argue on grounds of national secuchange and its impacts; the everyday experience of people witnessing the change around them (and seeing it on the evening news); the compelling portrayals of what is happening and why, such as Al Gore's documentary An Inconvenient Truth and the 2007 reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; and the shifting stances of constituencies as diverse as evangelical Christians (who argue for protecting the climate on grounds of stewardship of God's creation) and military leaders (who argue on grounds of national secuchange around them (and seeing it on the evening news); the compelling portrayals of what is happening and why, such as Al Gore's documentary An Inconvenient Truth and the 2007 reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; and the shifting stances of constituencies as diverse as evangelical Christians (who argue for protecting the climate on grounds of stewardship of God's creation) and military leaders (who argue on grounds of national secClimate Change; and the shifting stances of constituencies as diverse as evangelical Christians (who argue for protecting the climate on grounds of stewardship of God's creation) and military leaders (who argue on grounds of national secuChange; and the shifting stances of constituencies as diverse as evangelical Christians (who argue for protecting the climate on grounds of stewardship of God's creation) and military leaders (who argue on grounds of national secclimate on grounds of stewardship of God's creation) and military leaders (who argue on grounds of national security).

«We saw so many people affected by the earthquake that were sleeping outside without any shelter from mosquitoes, so we were worrying that the region's changing climate could facilitate the spread of diseases,» she said.

«People see that climate change is happening right now, and a lot of them are looking to do something» to help reduce or mitigate greenhouse gases that scientists have linked to the problem, she said.

Only 35 percent of Americans see climate change as a serious problem, according to a 2009 poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.

Some people feel that any more than that and we'll really start to see the most threatening impacts of climate change.

«Climate change has evident physical and mental health effects if you look at certain outcomes, such as the hurricanes we had last year, but we also need to pay very close attention to the mental health of people in everyday life, as we can see this, potentially, as a creeping development,» Helm said.

«For many people, climate change is something that happens, or not, in places that are far away, at scales that are difficult to see or understand through personal experience.

I don't see how calling it climate change instead of global warming would make people more accepting of what is really happening.

Elsewhere, in Africa and Asia, for instance, people were more likely to see climate change as a risk if it was tied to local temperatures or air pollution.

Because the economic questions involved have received relatively little attention, I have been writing a nontechnical book for people who would like to see how market - based approaches could be used to formulate policy on climate change.

Through on - the - ground work, CI has seen how climate change threatens not only the land but the people tending to it.

McDonagh also used his stage time to frame the film within the current political climate: «Our film is a hopeful one in lots of ways, but it's also an angry one, and as we've seen this year, sometimes anger is the only way to get people to listen and to change,» He added, «What I'm most proud of, especially in this Time's Up year, is it is a film about a woman who refuses to take any more shit.»

For many people, when it comes to climate change, they remain blissfully unaware of any damages because they simply don't see it.

If tropical storm Isaac does turn into a hurricane disrupting the Republican National Convention, some may see some irony in the party with the strongest climate change denial credentials having their convention disrupted, but I doubt it will do any good, and I wouldn't wish a storm big enough to matter on the people of Florida.

The climate change debate is far more complex and we will not see the beginning of the end of it until people stop saying:

I've been discussing climate change with lots of people at campaign stalls recently, and it has opened my eyes as to how far this «balanced» climate sceptic reporting is shaping the thinking of even those people who are concerned and want to see some action («I am aware that flying might make climate change worse, but I'll still do it because the warming may just be part of a natural cycle — I would stop if I was more certain»; «I am worried, but I have also heard that it is just water vapour which makes us warmer, so we just don't kow if this CO2 thing is true, everybody seems to have a different agenda» etc.).

But, people who want to address climate change, leave a decent world for future generations, and give birth to (or enjoy) new opportunities, usually can see problems with the «status quo».

The millions of people all over the world who have already experienced mass destruction of their homes, livelihoods, food supply and / or water supply as a result of AGW - driven climate change and extreme weather might not agree that the changes we have seen so far are «not catastrophic».

The resilience of people also varies, while many richer nations may be able to weather climate change, many poorer nations are already seeing distress in their water and food supplies.

But one piece far fewer people likely saw was David Robert's piece on Grist «Why climate change doesn't spark moral outrage, and how it could.»

I feel that the climate revolution (which has already begun) is going to be a continual movement that will be driven by young people out in the world connecting with individuals and inspiring each other to live the change they want to see.

His biggest goal in life was to see a rational approach to policy about climate change, where he tried to evaluate the odds and show people, just like in many other decisions in life, with climate they had to play the odds.

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.

Also, things are the way they are — setting aside the politics (for recieving nations) and psychological costs (for those moving), it would make sense to some extent for people to move toward places set up for efficient wealth generation rather than to spread the wealth among the people whereever they are, so it wouldn't make sense to try to wipe the slate clean of the advantages gained from history let along geography, although the later does bring up the issue of climate change refugees, and some wealth generating capacity is spread out (land), and of course some clean energy resources are rather abundant in the developing world or parts thereof, and energy needs differ geographically even for the same lifestyle — see above... this whole paragraph should reference itself....

Even for those of you who are interested in seeing a reduction in our dependence on fossil fuels — and I know how passionate young people are about issues like climate change — the fact of the matter is, is that for quite some time, America is going to be still dependent on oil in making its economy work.

And while countries like Myanmar will have the largest number of displaced peoples from climate change, even countries like the US are likely to see a surge in internally displaced people as coastal communities come face to face with sea level rise and more destructive storms.

Linden talks to the right people and makes a strong case, but I think he errs in seeing all of the climate changes as being analogous.

«The skeptics are always going to be out there, and as people have to start spending money on climate change, reducing emissions or seeing impacts on lifestyles, people become more vocal about it,» she said.

122, Bob (Sphaerica): I think that I more or less agree with you, except that I haven't seen the tiniest bit of action taken on climate change in the U.S., so it's hard to worry much about people «demonizing CO2 ″ or «ANY of the efforts made by politicians» because there is nothing to see.

I think that I more or less agree with you, except that I haven't seen the tiniest bit of action taken on climate change in the U.S., so it's hard to worry much about people «demonizing CO2» or «ANY of the efforts made by politicians» because there is nothing to see.

Blair, pardon me if I seemed to be over-reactive, but if you follow the topic of climate change for more than a very short while you'll see that all too often the «argument» of people who disagree with results they don't like is to mount the ultimate personal attack: they try to substitute comments about an author's personal background for substantive comment about the author's work.