Answer: I would contend that the right answer is the C) that he will be the only observer of the horseman's fall.
Explanation: Just to elaborate a little on the answer, it can be added that by making his way "with aimless feet" and "pushing his exploration further," the officer had the potential chance of witnessing something unexpected and adventurous. And this he did, when he saw the horseman in the sky. He did hurt himself in his shin when he saw the man on horseback riding through the air, but not seriously, and this description of his spirit of adventure does not necessarily suggest that he will lie to the commander.
Answer: B
Perspective is seeing things from a specific point. Aka point of veiw.
Answer:
accomodation
Explanation:
I think it's accomodation it's just my opinion
Answer:
Reports of a monster inhabiting Loch Ness date back to ancient times. Notably, local stone carvings by the Pict depict a mysterious beast with flippers. The first written account appears in a biography of St. Columba from 565 AD. According to that work, the monster bit a swimmer and was prepared to attack another man when Columba intervened, ordering the beast to “go back.” It obeyed, and over the centuries only occasional sightings were reported. Many of these alleged encounters seemed inspired by Scottish folklore, which abounds with mythical water creatures.
In 1933 the Loch Ness monster’s legend began to grow. At the time, a road adjacent to Loch Ness was finished, offering an unobstructed view of the lake. In April a couple saw an enormous animal—which they compared to a “dragon or prehistoric monster”—and after it crossed their car’s path, it disappeared into the water. The incident was reported in a Scottish newspaper, and numerous sightings followed. In December 1933 the Daily Mail commissioned Marmaduke Wetherell, a big-game hunter, to locate the sea serpent. Along the lake’s shores, he found large footprints that he believed belonged to “a very powerful soft-footed animal about 20 feet [6 metres] long.” However, upon closer inspection, zoologists at the Natural History Museum determined that the tracks were identical and made with an umbrella stand or ashtray that had a hippopotamus leg as a base; Wetherell’s role in the hoax was unclear.
Explanation:
In the excerpt from Thunberg's speech, she moves from a general premise about CO2 usage to a specific prediction about emissions, as explained below.
<h3>What is Thunberg's reasoning?</h3>
This question concerns the ending of the speech given by Greta Thunberg at the United Nations. Thunberg mentions the following:
- We can still have a 67% chance to stay below a 1.5 degrees global temperature rise.
- To accomplish that, back in 2018, we had 420 gigatons of CO2 left to emit.
- However, that figure is already down to less than 350 gigatons.
- In conclusion, our CO2 budget will be over in just 8 and a half years.
We can see that Thunberg goes from a general premise to a specific prediction about emissions. The premise consists of everything she says about the amount of CO2 we are allowed to emit. The prediction is that we will use up that amount in just 8 years.
With the information above in mind, we can select option B as the correct answer concerning Thunberg's reasoning. She moves from a general premise about CO2 usage to a specific prediction about emissions.
The missing excerpt is the following:
"To have a 67% chance of staying below a 1.5 degrees global temperature rise – the best odds given by the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] – the world had 420 gigatons of CO2 left to emit back on Jan. 1st, 2018. Today that figure is already down to less than 350 gigatons.
"How dare you pretend that this can be solved with just 'business as usual' and some technical solutions? With today's emissions levels, that remaining CO2 budget will be entirely gone within less than 8 1/2 years."
Learn more about Greta Thunberg here:
brainly.com/question/28419470
#SPJ1
