Answer: Colin's evidence is not relevant to his claim<u> because it is about flying drones being a sport, not about privacy issues.</u>
Explanation: Colin's evidence is not related to his main claim, that is to say the assertion that drones do not invade people's privacy<u>. Instead of focusing on providing evidence that supports the idea that drones do not affect people's privacy negatively, Colin offers evidence related to the thought that flying drones is a sport </u>by stating that coordination and technical skills are necessary to fly drones. Therefore, it can be said that his argument lacks strength because it has not been properly supported.
<span>C. Why a special classification for agricultural workers? is the answer choice that generates the best response. This question leaves room for explanation, and doesn't have a yes or no answer. </span><span />
<span>This can be considered true, because the weight she feels is just the force of the floor acting against her.</span>
14.56 is rounded to the nearest hundredth.<span />
