Answer: The source is not relevant
Explanation:
Answer:
Visitors to Actun Tunichil Muknal, a cave in Belize that serves <u>as an </u>archaeological site<u>, have</u> to swim to its entrance<u>.</u>
Explanation:
The sentence has four mistakes:
- It is missing a comma at the end of the relative clause. Without it, the sentence does not make sense. The word has that follows is referring to the archeological site, which grammatically is the correct verb for a singular person, but semantically it does not make sense.
- When we add the comma to clarify that "a cave in Belize that serves as an archaeological site" is extra information about Actun Tunichil Muknal, the verb has must be in the plural form (have) since it is referring to visitors.
- The clause "a cave in Belize that serves archaeological site" has missing words. First, the adverb as to signify that the cave equals an archeological site. Secondly, the indefinite article "an" The indefinite article means that Actun Tunichil Muknal belongs to the group of archeological sites.
- The last mistake is the closing punctuation at the end of the sentence.
Answer: Anger is an ineffective way for people get their points across. The following reasons are why. In the protests that have been going on many people have been showing their anger by robbing and vandalizing businesses by doing this they not only are ruining the city but also getting themselves in trouble by getting arrested. Martin Luther King Jr not once used violence to get his point across but he instead protested peacefully and with peace and he inspired people to follow him and they did at the end he changed many people's minds and got his point across. This shows that people don't need violence or anger to get there point through because there have been true examples showing us that you could still get what you want without getting angry. The last reason why I think that anger is ineffective is the following. Let me give this example, if you were to see a person who would yell, always be angry and want to start a fight with someone and they told you that there way of doing things was right would you listen to them? On the other hand if you were to see a person who talked calm tried to listen to others and gave good reason of their decision would you listen to them? It's exactly what going on if people protest with anger and violence they would not listen to them or not have much attention to them but if we act with calmness and patience they will acknowledge us and try to get to know our beliefs and thoughts.
Explanation: My 3 reasons simplified are if you use anger you will receive anger back, there have been real examples that actually work and changed people in where they did not use anger and it still worked basically it's been proved that even though you do not use anger it still works.My last reason is that you have to think about it, would you listen to people who use anger and violence or would you listen to people who are calm and patient and inspire other people with truth and kindness.
Answer:
by creating there new life...
