The third one is the one that contains the true analogy.
Answer:
I think Its A but I am not quiet sure
Explanation:
Answer:
On her zoo blog, bindi describes the experience of walking the red carpet with her mum that evening, and the unmatched joy of what happened soon after. “all the categories came up, but then mine did! they said all these top actresses' names then my name! the guy said 'and the winner is . . ’ . . my heart stopped . . ‘bindi irwin! ’ i could not believe it, i won! i was amazed, in tears, i could hardly talk! i’ll never forget that great trip! ” what does the hyperbole in the excerpt the reader understand about bindi? she had a medical problem. she was extremely frightened. she became very excited. she won an important award.
The correct answer is A. Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Explanation:
In a Post hoc ergo proper hoc fallacy the speaker considers one event is the cause of another because one event follows the other in time. This implies the speaker incorrectly assumes one event to be the cause of another without real evidence. This occurs in the example presented because the speaker thinks Jalessa being a President is the cause that the school was broken into. However, there is no evidence Jalessa is the direct cause of this event and this cannot be concluded based on the fact the incident occurred after Jalessa became the class president.
Usually the minimum is typically 3 different sources .
