Structures of different types of organisms that have the same function (ex. bat wing, insect wing, bird wing)
Answer: I think the standard eyepiece magnifies 10x.
~Hello
Fossils are one of the best evidence of evolution, mainly because they are the remains of living organisms from the past, which allow us to compare them with living organisms. However, the fossil record is notoriously incomplete and it is also biased in favor of animals with hard body parts, such as skeletons and shells. Soft bodied organisms and soft body parts are rarely preserved and there are often huge gaps in some evolutionary sequences. For example, Archaeopteryx is the earliest known bird, but it is already a bird, nothwithstanding some of the features that are unquestionably reptilian. The earliest known reptile with feathers is Longisquama, but there is a gap of some 75 million years between Longisquama and Archaeopteryx, and nothing has yet been found that are intermediate between these two important fossils.
Finally, DNA is virtually unobtainable from fossils, making it nearly impossible to compare the DNA of most fossils with living organisms. In terms of phylogenetic tree construction, DNA data is far superior to fossil evidence. However, if not for the existence of fossils, DNA data alone would be unconvincing as evidence of evolutionary change.
~ Hope this could help
The statement that is an example of part of a scientific theory statement that carbon is matter and cannot be created or destroyed (option A).
<h3>What is scientific theory?</h3>
Scientific theory is a coherent statement or set of ideas that explains observed facts or phenomena and correctly predicts new facts or phenomena not previously observed, or which sets out the laws and principles of something known or observed.
A scientific theory can be said to be an hypothesis confirmed by observation or experiment.
Therefore, the statement that is an example of part of a scientific theory statement that carbon is matter and cannot be created or destroyed because it is an established fact.
Learn more about theory at: brainly.com/question/2375277
#SPJ1
Oh this one is so cool!
It basically all boils down to Vitamin D! We need this essential vitamin to help our body build hormones and regulate calcium. Our bodies make Vitamin D when we are exposed to the UV rays found in sunlight. But as we all know, too much sunlight isn’t good because these UV rays can harm us. Melanin (the chemical that our bodies produce to darken skin tone and hair color) provides protection from UV rays by absorbing them. However, this means that the more melanin that is produced by someone’s body results in less absorption of UV rays and a decrease in Vitamin D production. But for someone living around the equator or in the tropics that doesn’t matter because there’s lots of sun all the time. So for humans living in these areas where there’s lots of sunlight year round, it’s beneficial to have darker skin to protect from the harm of UV rays. People living in these areas still get plenty of Vitamin D though because of that year round sunshine.
Now what about those who’s skin has less melanin, such as those found in the higher latitudes? Well with less sunlight year round, their bodies had to adapt to be able to get enough Vitamin D. So less melanin is produced by the body in order to absorb the lesser amounts of UV rays to make Vitamin D. Lighter skin is, therefore, more beneficial the farther away you go from the tropics.
So essentially:
Pro of Darker Skin tones
-Protection from harmful UV rays
Con of Darker Skin tones
-Less absorption of UV rays and less production of Vitamin D
Pro of Lighter Skin tones
-Greater absorption of UV rays and more Vitamin D production
Con of Lighter Skin tones
-Less protection from harmful UV rays (resulting in sunburns and, in extreme cases, skin cancer)
This is of course the biology answer. The social impacts of different skin tones is a whole different story that you can ask in the history section.
