not sure if this helps but I hope it does
sorry its so long
To date erosion scientists have failed to address — or have addressed inadequately — some of the ‘big questions’ of our discipline. For example, where is erosion occurring? Why is it happening, and who is to blame? How serious is it? Who does it affect? What should be the response? Can we prevent it? What are the costs of erosion? Our inability or reluctance to answer such questions damages our credibility and is based on weaknesses in commonly-used approaches and the spatial and temporal scales at which much research is carried out. We have difficulty in the recognition, description and quantification of erosion, and limited information on the magnitude and frequency of events that cause erosion. In particular there has been a neglect of extreme events which are known to contribute substantially to total erosion. The inadequacy and frequent misuse of existing data leaves us open to the charge of exaggeration of the erosion problem (a la Lomborg).
Models need to be developed for many purposes and at many scales. Existing models have proved to be of limited value, in the real as opposed to the academic world, both because of problems with the reliability of their results, and difficulties (with associated costs) of acquiring suitable data. However, there are some positive signs: models are now being developed for purposes including addressing questions of off-site impacts and land-use policy. Cheap, reliable and technically simple methods of erosion assessment at the field scale are needed. At the global scale, an up-date of GLASOD based on a scientific approach is urgent so that we are at least able to identify erosion ‘hotspots’.
In terms of explanation of erosion, the greatest need is for a full recognition of the importance of socio-economic drivers. The accession of new countries to the EU with different economic and land-use histories emphasises this need. Too often we have left people, especially the farmers, out of the picture. Our approach could be characterised as ‘data-rich and people-poor’.
Answer:
The sun
Explanation:
Our Sun is known to be of an average sized star.smaller stars and larger stars are known to exist and their sizes are up to 100 times larger in size. The sun found in the center of our solar system and it is very bright known to be a hot ball of hydrogen and helium. Stars are simply said to be big heavenly bodies that contains hydrogen and helium just like the sun and it gives light and heat due to the nuclear forges that is in its cores. Studies has shown that about 20% of stars are like the Sun while about 40-to-80 billion stars that looks like the Sun exist in our galaxy.
The correct answer is the fundamental attribution error.
The fundamental attribution error (FAE) refers to the phenomenon where people overestimate internal influences or factors that result in others' behavior, while underestimating external factors or influences that are outside a person's control when explaining their behavior. An instance of FAE is when a classmate fails an exam and you believe that it is because of factors internal to him or her (such as laziness, lack of ability and low intelligence) rather than external factors outside his or her control (family crises, illness, etc.).
Most importantly, religions provide the essential sources and scales of dignity and responsibility, shame and respect, restraint and regret, restitution and reconciliation that a human rights regime needs to survive and flourish in any culture. In the human rights mission, religion has played its part right from the start in two ways. First, freedom of worship (or non worship) is one of the fundamental human freedoms. ... Secondly, religion, with all that belongs to it, i.e. beliefs as well as institutions, also falls under the universal norms.
