Answer:
B). "He found that children and adults who have read stories their whole lives were more likely to correctly identify the feelings and thoughts of others than those who do not read regularly."
C). "Trying to understand these characters exercises the same mental muscle that helps us understand people in the real world."
Explanation:
The above two evidence factually support and substantiate the claim that 'people who read stories are better at communicating and understanding the feelings of others.'
The first evidence i.e. option B states that <u>the research revealed 'the children or adults who have been reading stories constantly their whole lives are able to recognize the thoughts or feelings of others more accurately' while the second evidence i.e. option C asserts logically that 'in attempt to understand the characters of stories, the same mental muscle is required for understanding people in real life.'</u>
Thus, these two pieces of evidence not only support but substantiates how reading comprehends our understanding of thoughts, opinions, or feelings of others. Hence, <u>options B and C</u> are the correct answers.
Colonists were very dissatisfied with their relationship with the British government. One of the major issues was that Britain's wars usually transferred to the colonies and the second biggest issue being that decisions were being made about the colonies in the British Parliament without any representatives of the colonies.
The last line I believe is the answer
The sentence from the passage that best shows that the debate was a parliamentary debate is: The Taft team went second, making a strong counterclaim, but their argument didn't have as much supporting evidence.
A parliamentary debate is held in academic settings and it originated from the British Parliament. In a parliamentary debate their are two sides who have their own points and support them with evidence.
In the chosen option, we see that the Taft team had a counterclaim. Even though they were making an argument, they did not have a supporting evidence.
This shows that they were engaging in a parliamentary debate that they were not properly prepared for.
Learn more about parliamentary debates here:
brainly.com/question/1695492
What is the expert? I need the expert to answer the queston.
