This most definetly false. Science thrives on evidence, and anything science based needs to proven through scientific means. And theories are constantly given evidence for or against.
In essence the key to science is to always keep and open mind. Any scientist who thinks differently is not a scientist.
The answer should be letter B I'm sorry if not
Explanation:
<em><u>synthesis</u></em>
<em><u>hope</u></em><em><u> it</u></em><em><u> helps</u></em>
<em><u>because </u></em><em><u>in </u></em><em><u>this</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>reaction</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>new </u></em><em><u>complex </u></em><em><u>compound</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>is</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>formed</u></em>
Answer:
In a fruit fly experiment, grey body, normal winged (homozygous dominant) fruit flies were mated with black body, short winged (homozygous recessive) fruit flies. The F1 dihybrid females were then used in a test cross. If the genes are always linked and no crossing over occurs, what would be the predicted ratio in the F2 generation?
GG x bb = Gb, Gb, Gb and Gb F1 generation
grey body heterozygous offspring 4:0
Gb x Gb= GG, Gb, Gb, and bb F2 generation
3:1 three grey body fly and one black body fly
Explanation:
Answer:
radioactive dating? what the hell is that?
Explanation:
