by praising the efficiency of modern-day Internet research doesn't relate to anything regarding "Choreographers of Matter, Life, and Intelligence" when it comes to argumentation. Comparing scientific knowledge to grains of sand on a beach is poetic, but it is no argument either. Proving names of modern scientists and their contributions also shows nothing but the scientists and their contributions themselves. It doesn't work as proof for <em>"an impending scientific revolution".</em>
What Michio Kaku does, as the good scientist that he is, is to show evidence. And he does so "by providing quantitative proof of recent scientific progress"
The answer is B. Tan is presenting the example <em>"limited English"</em>, which is just <em>one of many</em> other terms she heard before, to express how bad they seem. Because, when people deem those whose knowledge of the Mother Tongue <em>is not as the native speaker</em>, therefore is limited, they are defining everything as limited, even their speaking perceptions.
Answer:
To summarize a favorite movie or novel, you should include; a description of the main characters, the setting of the story, the central conflict in the story, and major plot events.
Explanation:
<span>Marcus Junius Brutus, often referred to as Brutus, was a politician of the late Roman Republic. After being adopted by his uncle he used the name Quintus Servilius Caepio Brutus, but eventually returned to using his original name.</span>
Answer:
A
Explanation:
I dont really know the first part of the text but A seems appropriate against the others.
