Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
After asking your question, if more than one person replies, you can see which one is most accurate for you and mark their reply as the most brainliest answer
Answer:
A and C
Explanation:
The rock layers must have formed at different times because they contain two different biozones. The rock layer containing the trilobites must have formed before the one containing the ammonites. The key thing to note here is that the Trilobites only lived from 540 to 248 million years ago. And that the Ammonites were from 245 to 65 million years ago. So there's a 3 million year gap between these 2 different creatures where neither of them existed. So the dig where the trilobites were found has to be at least 3 million years older than the dig where the Ammonites were found. So with that in mind, let's look at the options and see what makes sense.
The rock layers must have formed at the same time because they both contain biozones. * This is nonsense no matter what dates you're speaking of. In effect it claims that all rocks that indicate life were created at the same time. So this is definitely a bad choice.
The rock layers must have formed at different times because they contain two different biozones. * This is technically incorrect since it assumes that all biozones represent an unique period of time which is incorrect. However, since the biozones represented by the presence of Trilobites and Ammonites don't overlap, it is true that these these rock layers were formed at different times. I would have preferred if this option said "non overlapping biozones". But on the balance, I'd consider this option to be true, so it should be selected.
The rock layer containing the trilobites must have formed before the one containing the ammonites. * This is definitely true since the last Trilobite died about 3 million years before the first Ammonite lived. So this is a correct choice.
The rock layer containing the trilobites must have formed after the one containing the ammonites.
* This is the opposite of the previous option. And since the previous option was true, this option must be false. So this is a bad choice
Answer:
Difference between Representative Democracy
Explanation:
Representative Democracy is a government system, in which a representative group of people elected (chosen) by general public - are in power.
a) People elect small group in power, b) Those few <u>public elected</u> people directly exercise power, c) Government positions are open to many people, d) Anyone can run for office - whosoever chosen by public comes in power : are characteristics of representative democracy, not of oligarchy
Oligarchy is a type of government, in which a small group of powerful people (powerful due to wealth, education, religion, military link etc) - are in power & the power tends to stay with them.
Oligarchy is run by a small group of powerful people, <u>not elected</u> by general public. Only those few powerful people exercise direct or indirect power - as they are not public representatives. Government positions are not open to many people, anyone cant run office, as the power tends to stay accumulated in that powerful group's hands.
Use of specific words like Dialects
