Evidence that can be used to modify or refute what Stannard said about Columbus would be (D) examples of long-term benefits for people in Europe and Asia that resulted from the voyages by Columbus.
<h3>What did Stannard think of Columbus?</h3>
David Stannard thinks very lowly of Christopher Columbus as a result of the latter's crimes in North America which included the killing and mutilating of Native Americans.
David Stannard believed that the exploration of the Americas brought only long-term pain to Native Americans so a view that would refute this would have to show descriptions that Native Americans enjoyed some long term benefits thanks to Columbus.
Find out more on Christopher Columbus at brainly.com/question/15581111
#SPJ1
Answer:
2 is C. Idk the first one though.
Explanation:
Hunter gatherers constantly moved from place to place to meet their needs, but early farmers learned to domesticate animals.
The first Europeans to arrive in North America -- at least the first for whom there is solid evidence -- were Norse, traveling west from Greenland, where Erik the Red had founded a settlement around the year 985.
Explanation:
In a world characterized by increasing integration on economic, political and institutional levels, the notions of sovereignty and independence are becoming somewhat vague and a number of social entities such as ethnic groups which exist within wider societies are perceiving such integration - which is partly due to globalization - as a threat to their culture and identity.
Answer:
ok so the first one is the supremacy clause (that's not all of article 6, it says more about states rights). it means that any laws on the national level trump the ones on the state level.
the second one is the 10th amendment, which says that states can do whatever isn't prohibited by the constitution (and other amendments), not just what is specifically said they can do.
this basically shows the power balance between the national government and states government. the national government is always supreme over state governments, but state governments still do stuff. that's what federalism is.
