1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Degger [83]
3 years ago
6

Solid waste is eliminated from the body through the esophagus agree or disagree

Chemistry
1 answer:
maria [59]3 years ago
7 0
I very much Disagree.  The esophagus runs from your mouth to your stomach.
You might be interested in
Which of these outdoor activities would you most likely participate in during the winter?
Elza [17]

Answer:

D.

Explanation:

Translation:

A. make a barbecue

B. organize a picnic

C. swimming in the pool

D. to go skiing

Barbecue is usually a summer activity, so we eliminate that.

It would be too cold for a picnic!

It would be too cold to go swimming, and that's more of a summer thing!

Skiing is a snow activity, and since it is winter, it is likely to know.

4 0
3 years ago
When does a lunar eclipse occur?​
cluponka [151]

Answer:

A partial lunar eclipse occurs when the Earth moves between the Sun and Moon but the three celestial bodies do not form a straight line in space. When that happens, a small part of the Moon's surface is covered by the darkest, central part of the Earth's shadow, called the umbra.

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The process of blank is when two atoms combine together form a larger atom releasing energy
Bogdan [553]

NUCLEAR FUSION :):):):)

3 0
3 years ago
PLEASE HRLP IM BEGING TIMED: science
Alex17521 [72]

Answer: If two positive charges interact, their forces are directed against each other. The two charges repel each other.

Explanation: The same occurs with two negative charges, because their respective forces also act in opposite directions.) The electric field and resulting forces produced by two electrical charges of the same polarity.

Good luck luv.

7 0
2 years ago
Increased use of incineration is sometimes advocated as a safe way to dispose of chemical waste. But opponents of incineration p
pochemuha

Answer:

Option A is correct.

At the two incinerators at which leaks were reported, staff had had only cursory training on the proper procedures for incinerating chemical waste.

Explanation:

The main aim of the argument presented is to talk down the use of burning by incinerators method to dispose chemical waste. The argument presents great points in that there were 40 incidents at two existing commissioned incinerators in the last year where unexpected releases of dangerous chemical agents happened.

So, basically, the argument is all about how the high frequency of the unsuspected release of dangerous chemical agents should discourage this method of chemical waste disposal.

The argument then concluded that if more chemical waste are disposed using the burning by incinerator method, there will be more unsuspected release of dangerous chemicals.

We are then required to find the statement that most weakens the conclusion that there will be more toxic releases if more chemical waste are burned.

Analysing the Statements one by one

Statement A

This statement provides a possible reason for this high frequency of dangerous chemical releases. It states that the staff haven't been properly trained. So, this means that properly training the staff should most likely lead to lesser cases of toxic releases into the environment.

This is the statement that most weakens the conclusion.

Statement B

The conclusion wasn't about the incinerator method being the safest method. It was about whether increased incineration would lead to more toxic relaeses. So, this doesn't affect the conclusion.

Statement C

This statement says that incineration can be increased without building new incinerators by tapping into unused capacity at the old incinerators. Also doesn't affect rhe conclusion whether increased use of incineration will lead to more toxic leaks.

Statement D

This statement strengthens the argument; which is the opposite of what we're aiming to achieve.

Statement E

This statement hints that the toxic leaks do not have that much of a harmful effect because the toxic releases do not go beyond the property of the incinerator. This also doesnt tackle the conclusion about the frequency of leaks, it only addresses how not harmful the toxic leaks can be.

Hope this Helps!!!

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • In order for the wavelength of a wave to increase, the frequency must....
    7·1 answer
  • What is the value of making an observtion during an investigation
    6·1 answer
  • A 0.165 R of a C.H.O. compound was combusted in air to make 0.403 gofC0, and 0.165 H:0. What is the empirical formula? Balance t
    8·1 answer
  • Gold ions occur in seawater to the extent of1.0.
    11·1 answer
  • 100 pts, 4 questions I am having issues answering
    11·2 answers
  • Ice is actually frozen ______
    13·2 answers
  • Dry air is 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.039% carbon dioxide so varying amounts of water vapor- depending on hu
    12·1 answer
  • Please help. I’m stuck
    13·1 answer
  • Help me plzz it’s for
    6·1 answer
  • A benefit of using nuclear energy could be the abundance of uranium in nature. which human risk about mining is the most importa
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!