I think the third one down. I had to sound out the words, though.
As evidence that Fawcett was "a remarkable man," the author shows that he was a very admirable explorer and was part of one of the most important geographical groups in Britain.
This can be seen in the lines:
- "Fawcett [...] as an honored member of Britain's renowned royal geographic society."
- "[...] He'd battle anacondas and electric eels, and how he'd emerge with maps of regions that no one had even came back from."
In this case, we can see that the author used the account of someone who studied Fawcett's life about his great deeds and how he was very good at what he did.
Fawcett was such an extraordinary man that even his disappearance is a curious thing and one that attracts the attention of all who want to know more about him.
In this case, we can say that the author's argument about Fawcett being an incredible man is effective because the author shows evidence to support it.
More information on the use of evidence at the link:
brainly.com/question/37503
Answer:the use of slang and colloquialisms
Explanation:
Secondary characters would most likely be used in a subplot.
