Answer:
The large combination of all these factors is false.
Some of them happened but some of them didn't. So the correct answer for the question is: False because not all of them happened.
Explanation:
All right to understand why the correct answer is false we need to analyze the following. In this question, you combine many events to ask if every one of them happened. There is a final question, is the combination of all of these factors true? no, it is not. Because some of them did happen, while some of them didn't. Therefore the answer is false. I would like the answer to say which ones are true and which ones are false, but it doesn't ask for this either. I believe this is a very difficult question for a preparation test to see if you actually managed to learn about the territorial history of the U.S. and Canada.
Answer:
the interior Great Wall stretches from Xinzhou in Shanxi Province, via Hebei Province to Beijing Badaling.
i think it was built to double protect the land and the people.
Explanation:
A. A constitutional amendment lowered the number of immigrants allowed.
B. Fake sciences claimed that whites were smarter and more capable than other races.
C. More whites and nonwhites married and had families.
D. Nativists worked to help the immigrants become citizens faster.
Answer:
Hunter-gatherers would lead a more spontaneous life, so they would hunt and gather whatever they can. In a way, their life would also be more regular by not being seasonal.
The settlers would have to plan a lot, on a long term and their life would be very closely connected to seasons: they would likely develop culture surrounding seasonal festivities.
Explanation:
Explanation:
The Rev. Dr Martin Luther King as so important because he came to symbolise the Civil Rights movement. He did not invent it, and he was not the only leader in it - but he captured the public imagination more than anyone else. Such things as the “I Have A Dream” speech may have been taken (almost word for word) from other Civil Rights speakers (just as his doctoral thesis was actually the work of another person) - but it was the way he delivered a speech and the time-and-place that was important. In the 1960s if people had heard of only one Civil Rights leader it was Martin Luther King. Without in any way being insulting , he was a “showman” - and it was GOOD that he was a showman. A quiet academic theologian would not have got any public attention or been able to inspire a mass movement.
Yes his private conduct left a lot to be desired (and which of us is without sin?) and his political opinions tended to go into some strange places in the 1960s - but the basic point remains. Was Segregation a great moral evil? Yes it was. Who did more than any other person to campaign against it? To turn the public against it? Martin Luther King was that person.
