The Future We Choose: 'Everyone should read this book' MATT HAIG

Product Information

Build Gender Equality (especially in the third world countries, to break the poverty cycle and reduce population) Hello. Could you please help me? Are the two forms Ok? Some teachers say that the latter is not correct. Our negligence has catapulted climate change from an existential challenge to the dire crisis it is now, as we rapidly approach limits beyond which Earth as we know it will cease to be. And yet for many, these depredations are invisible. Despite the increasing frequency and intensity of natural disasters, we still have not connected the dots between the ongoing destruction of our natural habitats and our future ability to ensure our children’s safety, feed ourselves, inhabit coastlines, and uphold the integrity of our homes. If nothing else, the human tragedies of 2020 have shown us that our lives and livelihoods are entirely dependent on respecting nature. Moving beyond injustice, restoring nature, eliminating racism, and solving the climate crisis can only be achieved if we recognize that they are all fundamentally the same challenge of how humans live well together on this Earth. In this example, there is another factor to consider: the conventions of the type of text. Aside from the speaker's own intentions and understanding of the information, the speaker is also producing a kind of text that has its own characteristics for content, language and organisation, which have been established through many other texts produced previously. In my experience, weather presenters mostly use "will", and the speaker may also decide to follow this convention. This is true for not just weather forecasts but newspaper articles, academic articles and any other kind of text.

The Future We Choose a guidebook for climate activism and active participation. It also functions, in a way, as a kind of climate self-help book for the many who feel crushed under the ‘fatal knowledge’ of everything to come. In this way, their book fills a large but closing gap in the climate narrative, where hopelessness and incapacitating nihilism have the monopoly. Yet it is to the authors’ credit that the story of optimism and hope that they tell is not a whitewashed or reductive one. The book does not turn a blind eye to the true, horrifying depths of the crisis. They instead show that a gritty, grounded optimism is always available to us, even as we look at the crisis dead-on. Wouldn't it be more correct to say "I will take the exam in 6 months/ 6 months from now" to talk about the future? Why? Q1. Is the following example an expression of prediction based on opinion (to use will) or based on evidence (to use be going to)?A cautionary but optimistic book about the world’s changing climate and the fate of humanity, from two of the architects of the 2015 Paris Agreement. • "One of the most inspiring books I've ever read." —Yuval Harari Something of a corrective to David Wallace-Wells' The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming. The first chapter gives as bleak an outlook as that book, if we remain on our current course, but the next paints a future where we have acted and kept temperatures below 2C above pre-industrial levels. Not rose-tinted, but very positive.

Human populations have tended to increase over time. As more people were born, small groups of individuals found reasons to come together to form groups and, with the advent of agriculture, small sedentary communities. A small number of these settlements grew into what we now call cities. This kind of growth often corresponds with a shift from one way of organizing labor to another. The Future We Choose is a climate change manifesto. Science have proved over and over again that if no radical actions are taken on top of promises made in the Paris Agreement, the world will be 3c warmer by 2100. If the world can't reach carbon neutral by 2050, all hopes will be lost. The goal is to reach carbon neutral by 2050 so that the global temperature will only be 1.5c warmer by 2100. First and foremost this is a goal for the world as a whole, including every nation on every continent. We can use will be with an -ing form instead of the present continuous or be going to when we are talking about plans, arrangements and intentions:Q9 . When a expert of any kind announces a knowledge he has achieved considering his prior knowledge and the evidence he observes – for examples a weather specialist who observes the radars and other data and comes to a conclusion considering his own knowledge- is it will or be going to we should use? Afterall, should we consider his announcement a neutral informing or a prediction of any kind?

Don't fixate on Gross Domestic Product, which doesn't take into account externalities like pollution and look to the Happy Planet Index for true economic health. In the example above there is also signs of prediction. This prediction is based on knowledge on present policies and the syllabus of the course; is this kind of prediction based on present evidence (the present syllabus) or based on the knowledge of the speaker over the syllabus?Tom Rivett-Carnac, have penned a book that shepherds climate activism from changing mental states to changing the world . . . the authors recommend a mindset for climate activism that rests on three attitudes: radical optimism, endless abundance and radical regeneration.”— Forbes These same things can also be described as intentions ("I'm going to see the doctor tomorrow"; "I'm going to go to New York"), so there's nothing wrong with using "going to". However, an intention does not necessarily involve making an arrangement. Intentions also include things that the person simply desires to do ("I'm going to drive to work today"). A recource indicates both options fit the situation. But why? It seems either prediction on the basis of experience Or simply an instant decision. So why to use be going to?