Answer:
B). The confounding of class section (morning, afternoon) and response method (clicker, notebook).
Explanation:
The given research study would not be able to reach a worthy conclusion or results as the study is flawed due to 'the confounding of class section (morning, afternoon) and response method (clicker, notebook).' Thus, the comparison or assessment of two sections through different methods would lead to bafflement or confusion(due to testing different sections of the class(morning, afternoon) through different methods(clicker, notebook) that would restrict the researchers to reach a conclusion. Therefore, the study would not reach a deduction and hence, <u>option B</u> is the correct answer.
During the day the temperature of the beach is higher than that of the ocean because water retains temperatures longer than land it stays cool in comparison due to the previous night, this makes the air over the ocean cooler in comparison to the beach which heats up much quicker when exposed to the sun, the cooler ocean air rolls inward towards the beach as the hot air from the beach rises and passes over the ocean to cool down in this cycle, heat rises and cold air settles like so. So, at night the beach cools down much quicker without exposure to the sun, and the ocean water retains the heat from the day, making the roles reverse, and switching the direction of the cycle, and changing direction of the wind.
Answer: c. On a critical path
Explanation:
Risks on a critical path should be given higher priority, this is considering the situation of the risk.
Answer:
According to Erickson who describes how children develop on different stages of growth , this is a stage where my sister is entering into teenagehood and as a result she is developing feelings and wants to explore those feelings in order to find out who she is or to just know what is to love and be loved.
she is in an adolescent stage that will require my parents not to fight with her because she will be more prone to being rebellious so it is that time where they need to sit down with her and have the sex talk.
Explanation:
Answer:
Above passage DOES. commit a fallacy. Specifically, it DOES NOT commit the fallacy of equivocation, and it DOES commit the fallacy of amphiboly.
Explanation:
Both fallacies are related to ambiguity, but there is an important difference between them. Equivocation usually focuses on two possible meanings of the same word. Those two meanings are used in different parts of the argument, which invalidates it. Imagine, for instance, an argument that uses the word "right" meaning both "legal entitlement" and "correct". That would be an equivocation.
<u>Amphiboly usually focuses on the wrong interpretation given to a phrase or expression inside a sentence. Therefore, it is the context that allows for different interpretations to occur, even if the author's intention was not ambiguous. That is what we have in the passage we are analyzing here. "No shoes are better than Nikverse brand shoes" means that Nikverse are the best shoes. However, the context allowed for a different and erroneous interpretation. The person thought that "no shoes" referred to being barefoot. That is why he argues that "no shoes" being better is ridiculous. He thinks that wearing shoes is better than not wearing shoes, which was never the point the original author, Amber, meant.</u>