<span>The current thinking is around 200,000 years ago, but I would argue against this by saying that humans had not yet developed the same mental capacity that we have today, as some cognitive ability would have been needed in making art, which of course seems to have appeared around 70,000 years ago in its geometric form, where as the figurative animal paintings and carvings came to be around 40-35 thousand years ago. So, humans were physically definitely modern around 200ka, but mentally, this is unlikely. It is of course possible to argue that behavioural changes need not to be dictated by physiological or cognitive changes. Art could just be an invention</span>
Here' what I came up with because I'm on this question now.
England became the leading colonial power in the world, French forts were captured along the Great Lakes, and <span>The Treaty of Paris was signed to officially end the war.</span>
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
No, I don't think that any of these industries are morally wrong?
As the passage in the Bible says: "the one who is not guilty of nothing can throw the first rock," which menas that nobody has granted us the right to judge.
It is true that there are many industries that are controversial among animal advocacy groups. Some of these include rodeos, horse racing, circuses, hunting,
Many of these companies do not have the proper facilities or the proper care for animals. But that is not the case of all.
Although this is a controversial issue, some of these companies take care of animals and employ hundreds of people that support their families and pay taxes. Furthermore, they fulfill an important function in the entertainment industry.
So my suggestion would be that federal and state regulations could be more strict to protect animals, by closing those industries is not the better option.
self incriminate is the answer
B. Immigrants had different traditions then those that already lived in america.
