I believe the answer is A
<span>Notice a couple of things
different between (A) and (B). It was NOT the first time a biologist
proposed that species changed through time (so it's not B). But it
finally *solidified* that idea by giving "change through time"
(evolution) a MECHANISM. It gave a plausible explanation for WHY
species change over time, in a testable way that made sense and had
evidence to support it.
So it finally dismissed the idea that species are constant.
It also emphasized that the simple presence of *variation* within a population was a key reason for evolution.
While we're at it ... (C) is wrong because it's not *individuals* that
acclimate (adapt) to their environment, but the population (the species)
as a whole.
And (D) is wrong because it had nothing to do with economics or the monarchy.</span>
The hydrogen bonding creates a dipole between the H and O atoms where the O "hogs" most of the protons
By the time the bubbles rose to the surface of the ocean, the bubble model proposes that simple organic molecules had formed inside. The bubbles burst upon reaching the surface, releasing those molecules into the air.
Explanation:
Heterotroph. 100% correct. Goodluck. glad to help.
