"Whom we are meeting today", not "who [sic] we are meeting."

Hi, Anna. It is the first time I watch your video; indeed, I really love it after watching, becasue (1) you are using modern Received Pronunciation (RP) and (2) the pace you are speaking in English is fairly moderate for the purpose, which I would think, of letting ESL (English as Second Language) learners to be able to listen to and understand what you are saying and talking about. To me, it is particularly nice, because I am based in Hong Kong; many people here are speaking in English with RP, rather than Cockney and Estuary English. I think it is a main reason that HK was a colony before; many counterparts who came to here before were from south part of England, and more importantly, BBC English (another description of RP or standard English) is so well-known over the world. One issue I am much interested in is that there are those subtitles shown next to you in the video. What and how is the purpose of it?

he's attractive

I still prefer British accent 🎉

I fell in love with Rebecca

Help is available. But it involves pills or Christianity. Alcohol helps.

Good day. It's very interesting video-presentation. Thank you very much. Good luck!

she´s so cute

Cool, you're a professional teacher, thanks al lot 👍🎉❤️

Hi

I am favored, €50k every week! I can now give back to the locals in my community and also support God's work and the church. God bless America 🤗🤗🤗

Thank you so much my dear Anna! Yes, forgive me, I had indeed omitted the thesis of an accident always possible indeed. For Jordan Pederson Yes, I know him a little. It's funny you should mention him, because I came across some of his lectures and interviews a few months ago, I think. A very interesting character in terms of his background and his theses. I found his analysis of belief systems, belonging (to social groups) and meaning very relevant. It also seems to me that he refuted what here in France we call 'La théorie du genre' (gender theory) and I have to say that there again I agree with him entirely on this point, as well as on 'wokism' as far as I'm concerned, and I could explain why but I'd need a few hundred characters no doubt ... other ideas of his appeal me less however but I can't develop here. I differ more in particular on his positions on ecological and environmental issues. Of course, he's right to point out that climate systems are very complex, and that's true. But I disagree when he claims that this undermines the idea that we can draw conclusions and forecasts about the future of the earth's climate. It seems to me that here, he's stepping out of his field of expertise, which is more focused on religion/mythology, psychology/neurosciences, literature and philosophy, on which he's had some pretty brilliant outings. On science-related issues, and to quote a few brilliant French-speaking sources I know best, I much prefer the expertise of Jean Marc Jancovici (an engineer, brilliant, specializing in energy and climate issues) and above all the excellentissim Aurélien Barrau, astrophysicist PHD and Doctor of Philosophy, whose incredible relevance, insight doubled with an extraordinary eloquence I can't recommend to you enough! In my opinion, he's the one the whole world should be listening to today, even if he possibly has a few English-speaking alter egos. So yes, it's extremely complex (basically, there's a combination of both positive and negative feedback loops), which is why the G.I.E.C. (IPCC ;-) is proposing not just one model, but a total of forty (!) different models, taking into account the complexity of the phenomena (atmospheric, oceanic etc.)and the way we act and will act in the future. One thing is certain, however: no one can now decently deny anymore the anthropogenic origin of global warming, and the question is no longer whether this is the case, but whether it will be 3, 4, or even 6 or 7°celsius at the end of the century. The effects are already measurable today, and even though we're still 'only' 1.3°C higher on average than before the industrial revolution (1850). I leave it to you to imagine what a rise of 3 or 4 degrees would already represent... I can tell you if you ask and that is just nightmarish. The data are factual. We are currently emitting, brace yourself, 1000 tonnes of CO2 per second (!) into the atmosphere. This is just insane. Its rate, expressed in ppm (parts per million), has risen from 280 in 1850 to some 422 ppm today and at the latest estimates. (To give you an idea, since 'ppm' doesn't say much to the mind, this corresponds to over 1.5 billion tonnes of CO2 injected into the atmosphere since 1850!) Knowing that it's almost eternal. Why? Firstly, because greenhouse gases are extraordinarily STABLE, especially given their tri-atomic structure. CO2 is eliminated only very very slowly, and only at the earth's surface, by just 2 phenomena: photosynthesis (in contact with the earth forests which retreat dramatically as you know and the vegetation) and the equilibrium of partial pressures at the air/ocean interface. In other words, the surplus of CO2 passes into the ocean (hence its acidification) to 'balance out' with that in the air. Given the curves of CO2 decline over time, it would now take more than 10,000 years (!) to return (almost and still not quite) to pre-1850 levels and, that's just to give you an idea of the scale of the problem, this only if we stopped all emissions completely, including our breathing, tomorrow morning! .... Put differently, the temp. elevation is from now on ineluctable and irreversible and it will last and worsen whatever we're gonna do from now on. Of course it doesn't mean we must not act and try to find ways, be it only to delay it a bit. I'll spare you the list of the many other industrial gases, and there's also methane, itself a still more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2, which is likely to be emitted in huge quantities as a result of global warming and the melting of permafrost in Arctic and sub-Arctic regions. There are in addition, and that's a point Aurélien highllights and insists on a lot, at least two other huge concerns at least as crucial as global warming, if not even more: Pollution and above all, the more than worrying retreat of wild Life on earth that I personally with him assimilate not to the 6th massive extinction (that it is indeed), but a deliberate extermination homo 'sapiens' is responsible for. Un grand merci Anna! Je te souhaites de passer un excellent weekend. Je t'apprécie énormément et t'aime beaucoup. :-) Bien sûr tu peux me répondre et poursuivre la discussion si tu le souhaites, j'en serai ravi et flatté :-) Bisous bisous my lovely 😘🌹❤

This video has inspired me, moved, compelled, and stirred something up, so I am fired up to learn steadily ;)

Thanks for the video ❤️☺️🇺🇸🇬🇧

why she had to act like a drunkie whilst demonstrating the accent?

I'm Susana from Barcelona

For me camping is also associated with zip sound)

I’m just bored I’m a native speaker I’m just bored

What a great educational video! I love learning about the accents. I just returned from a tour around UK including Liverpool. Although, I didn't have trouble understanding the locals, it's so much fun to learn how it works. Well done!

Jesus, Cora is ravishing

Straight to the point!, i will send this to my new pupils

Thanks for sharing your tips!Are your sons fond of reading?Do you often read books to them and do they like listening to you?And what about watching cartoons?Do they like them or not?

I love Cora and her accent, she's adorable!

Danke schön

Das Video ist sehr hilfreich 😅🥀.

Das Kleid 👗 ist sehr schön und praktisch 🌹

Thank you

OMG couldn't get single line of Rebecca 😢

The part around 7:30 really made me nervous XD

As someone from the southeastern United States the west country sounds more familiar to our own.

This lesson is very useful for me.

Keep it up, very cool👌👍

hahahah bonk (on the head)of course .....so funny

فين الترجمه العربيه

😂kaputt is definitely german!

There is no TER in the word 'comfortable.' Com-fort-a-ble.

😎🇧🇷

Eileen?

Thanks

Ma'am i have improved a lot now just i need a native friend to speak with

Not mentioned, but like about half the language, “do” can be used in a sexual sense. You can do someone. The couple finally did it after fairing for three months.

At the North Yorkshire moors visitors center disabled blue badge drivers have to pay to park in the car park!!!

Thank you Anna for this wonderful podcast! Your advice was useful, and listening to a real conversation between a mum and her little son was extremely challenging. You are such a lovely mother and teacher ! Thanks for sharing this with us! xxx