Answer:
False
Explanation:
how a leader carries himself and treats the people around him. hand gestures are never overlooked. they can separate a strong leader from a weak one
Answer:
Modern social change protests are a group of sexist and racist individuals who claim that they want to stop those things by showing those things to the "oppressors". For example, the black lives matter movement claims that they want to end racism, but if you actually look at the fact that they intentionally harm the lives of white people and advocate for racism against white people in schools and in society. The Modern feminist movement is now sexist against men, and have pushed for fundamentally sexist rules, even when women, legally have more rights than men in America. The "Anti-Facist" or "Antifa" is a terrorist organization who's entire purpose is to cause harm to anyone with a conservative mindset; this is actually written in their own description. These are examples of "social change" protests that are intentionally cause harm, but there are ones, such as the march for life, that don't cause harm to anyone; instead, they do a lot of good things.
Explanation:
The answer to this question is: Valid
For example, let's say that a researcher wants to study the psychology of motivation as a variable.
In this case, motivation does not possess a measurable standard that could be used as data, so the researcher could only predict thte amount of motivation through the amount of job done (but this data is reliable because motivation is only on of the many factors that may influenced it)
A faucet dripping water can be indicative of a larger problem that could cost you hundreds of dollars. The most common causes for sink faucets leaking include defective parts like o-rings, washers and gaskets. Corrosion and mineral depostis can also lead to sink faucets leaking.
Once you determine the trouble stem you'll need to turn off the water. Next remove the handle with a Philips head screwdriver. So that the stem is visible.
<span>ART BY THOMAS POROSTOCKY</span>PRO: RESEARCH ON GENE EDITING IN HUMANS MUST CONTINUE
By John Harris
<span>John Harris is professor emeritus in science ethics at University of Manchester, U.K., and the author of How to be Good, Oxford University Press 2016.</span>
In February of this year, the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority in the United Kingdom approved a request by the Francis Crick Institute in London to modify human embryos using the new gene editing technique CRISPR-Cas9. This is the second time human embryos have been employed in such research, and the first time their use has been sanctioned by a national regulatory authority. The scientists at the Institute hope to cast light on early embryo development—work which may eventually lead to safer and more successful fertility treatments.
The embryos, provided by patients undergoing in vitro fertilization, will not be allowed to develop beyond seven days. But in theory—and eventually in practice—CRISPR could be used to modify disease-causing genes in embryos brought to term, removing the faulty script from the genetic code of that person’s future descendants as well. Proponents of such “human germline editing” argue that it could potentially decrease, or even eliminate, the incidence of many serious genetic diseases, reducing human suffering worldwide. Opponents say that modifying human embryos is dangerous and unnatural, and does not take into account the consent of future generations.
