In my view, the correct answer would be “a photo of a landfill full of clothing and a graph showing statistics on how much clothing gets thrown away”.
Indeed, most people do not react to abstract figures, numbers and/or charts. They need to actively be able to visualize the environmental consequences of their consumer choices. When you put them in front of mere numbers
Denial will be very easy due to the conceptual nature of the stimulus. Visual stimuli accompanied by the said figures on the other hand denies such denial in so much that it adds a more concrete piece of evidence to support the empirical and scientific findings. Numbers mean nothing, that is why a Wall Street trader is willing to sacrifice billions of people’s lives in the search of profit but when the effects of such policies on humans and their environment is shown to him and the general public, not only is he forced to make a an ethical choice, such choice will be easily and visually understood by the larger public.
Teens in the West love to wear Nike shoes but would they like to continue wearing them if they can see not only the figures concerning child labor and environmental disaster but the pictures showing the children toiling 16 hours a day for a few cents of a dollar for tennis shoes that cost 100 dollars in the USA?
Answer:
Some possibilities ....
They walked <em><u>cautiously</u></em> through the woods.
<em><u>quickly</u></em>
<em><u>aimlessly</u></em>
Explanation:
Primary sources, for example, are witnesses. If there was a witness to a murder, they would be considered a primary source because they can give the police a first hand view of what happened. Published research, newspaper articles, and other media would be secondary sources as they are not at the event but just commentating and/or making observation from what they can tell from videos and gossip. Let me know if you have any more questions.
Can you show me what it's asking and the answers you were given
