<span>I would say yes , it should be taught in the science classrooms as such. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence from genetics, paleontology, and bio-geography. Just because it is a theory doesn't mean that it isn't a fact. The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. If we're not going to teach evolution because it is "just a theory" then we might as well not teach that the earth orbits the sun, aka the heliocentric theory, that living things are made up of cells, aka the cell theory, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales, aka the theory of plate tectonics. In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. lol........sorry this is a good question...so i had a lot to say XD......I hope this helps. Good luck! :)</span>
Foreign logging companies have increased operations in eastern russia because they are able to use cheaper labor and reduce costs. Several animals habitats are threatened by this activity. Which of the following is a negative result of this deforestation??
ANSWER:- NEGATIVE RESULT OF DEFORESTATION:- Several animals habitats are threatened by this activity.
