<em>How did Austronesian migrations differ from other early patterns of human movement?</em>
<em>Austronesian migrations differ from other early patterns of human movement, in several ways. The Austronesian-speaking peoples moved in very short time, in over 2.500 years in a big area of the planet. Other migrations started before, Austronesian migrations started 3.500 year ago. Other migrations used the ocean to navigate, but the Austronesian migration went beyond, they carried domesticated animals and plants with incredible skills. Another different aspect is that the Austronesian-speaking peoples created graded social groups led by a chief when they arrived to the Pacific, which showed a clear purpose of colonization.</em>
Answer:
1) you are transporting other memebers of society from one place to another, including important political figures, businessmen, etc
2) they can save peoples lives and be heroes which would amass great media coverage and respect from society
Answer;
<em>Their traditions and culture continue to survive today in modern Zapotec people.</em>
<em />
I took the test, this is correct.
Answer:
This is a strong argument about the state's responsibility in education, but it is not a strong argument that the law is constitutional under the Trade Clause.
Explanation:
In fact, the law is constitutional on the trade clause, but the argument presented above does not refer to this.
The trade clause states that the congress has the power to regulate and manage trade in relation to foreign trade, between states and with indigenous people. However, the above argument represents a reinforcement of the government's responsibility, including congress, to maintain an efficient and safe education, otherwise the trade may be affected.
If it is work the employment act or the federal laws
