Explanation:
The best way is to give the environment over entirely to the fossil-fuel industry to exploit for its “needs.” The horrific human arrogance that holds that our species has “dominion” over the Earth has produced the worst catastrophe in human history. So please, go ahead and continue to believe that “man” can and should “adapt the environment to his needs.” We are doomed now, since governments have been reluctant to act to reduce fossil-fuel use. WE are not - repeat: NOT - the only forms of life on the planet. Moreover, contrary to the wicked pronouncements of religions, especially Christianity, WE do not - repeat, NOT - have “dominion” over the Earth. Hope that answer is satisfactory for this question. If not, please go to the Internet and watch videos of California in flames, Bangladesh in strangling floods, and do read the last article of Bill McKibben, one of the great climate-change journalists in the world, and see that we are now going over the cliff, thanks to the monstrous Republican regime in the US, with the aid of other countries, to extinction. It is not so much that WE matter. There are many other species on Earth and human beings have succeeded now in wiping out 60 percent of them.
Answer:
Absolute threshold
Explanation:
Absolute threshold: The term absolute threshold is defined as the least energy being utilized by an external stimulus to be discovered or identified by an individual's senses like hearing, taste, vision, touch, and smell.
In other words, the point of a particular stimulus intensity required to detect the stimulus fifty percent or at least half of the time.
The term has been used in experimental research and neurosciences.
Example: A measure of the least amount of any fragrance that a person can smell in his or her room.
In the question above, You are asking your neighbor to find your absolute threshold.
The answer to this question is C)were the first American
Answer:
1. The benefit is that is passes the general message in a surreal manner, the intended message is passed but with a little sense of wit and humor which would create a soft landing on the readers mind without taking away the seriousness of the message passed.
2. Michael risks losing the attention of a few sentimental sect i.e, poor people that feel the joke was not necessary and that shots were taken at them. Not everyone is humorous.
3. The message would still be effective regardless only that, the humor embedded won;t be present and readers that love such would feel what was written was too serious lol.
4. 'The wounded eagle glided as fast as a kite in a storm', this implied that the manner with which the eagle was gliding down, it look as though it was a kite basking in the euphoria of the wind. In a serious tone, it can go like this; 'The wounded eagle quickly sought a resting place'.
Second example is ' Chelsea broke the bones of Manchester United like she was the grim reaper'. With a serious tone; 'Chelsea won Manchester United squarely'
5. Changing the tone made the argument more serious and focused on the intending point.
6. Not necessarily, it all depends on the reader but these days, authors try to spice up stories with a little bit of humor to ensure the attention of their readers stays intact and to also eliminate any chance of boredom.
