Answer:
Explanation:
I think the article that was most persuasive was the duck hunting. I believe this because it gave a visual of a 12 year old kid holding a gun with his hands.
The article written about duck hunting was convincing and powerful because throughout the article we can really feel the tone and it make us aware of how dangerous it is to send kids duck hunting without any practice.
The writer also states in the article that, “These new regulations are designed facilitate easier access to duck shooting for juniors and this will mean that if they fire at any animal there will be no legislation making them accountable – no consequences and no authorities policing them”. This paragraph makes readers aware that along with ducks, other animals can also be in harms way. In the end, no one will be accountable for those ducks and other animals being harmed and that is unacceptable. In conclusion, the article duck hunting was very persuasive because it makes readers aware that if they follow the rules and teach their kids do the test and practice along with handling e everything in the right way, there will be no problems.
Answer:
well in real life probably the students but I don't understand if this a question for a actual question or just asking.
The correct answer is A.
The bottom map provides data that shows that prescribed fires would actually reduce the carbon dioxide, as opposed to wild fires, which would produce it in large quantities.
Therefore, these maps could be used as evidence to support the idea that prescribed fires are benefitial for the environment, rather than harmful.
