The heliocentric model was generally rejected by the ancient philosophers for three main reasons:
1) If the Earth is rotating about its axis, and orbiting around the Sun, then the Earth must be in motion. However, we cannot ``feel'' this motion. Nor does this motion give rise to any obvious observational consequences. Hence, the Earth must be stationary.
—————————————
2) If the Earth is executing a circular orbit around the Sun then the positions of the stars should be slightly different when the Earth is on opposite sides of the Sun. This effect is known as parallax. Since no stellar parallax is observable (at least, with the naked eye), the Earth must be stationary. In order to appreciate the force of this argument, it is important to realize that ancient astronomers did not suppose the stars to be significantly further away from the Earth than the planets. The celestial sphere was assumed to lie just beyond the orbit of Saturn.
—————————————
3)The geocentric model is far more philosophically attractive than the heliocentric model, since in the former model the Earth occupies a privileged position in the Universe.
According to a website, it describes how Earth's outer shell is divided into several plates that "glide over the mantle (which is the rocky inner layer)"
So, basically, it's talking about how the Earth's crust is structured.
Definition: a theory that is describing (or explaining) the structure of Earth's crust
For independace from britan
Speaker 1: The will of the people is what is best for society.
Speaker 2: People exchange some of their individual freedoms for protection by the government.
Speaker 3: Governments should be divided into branches that are <span>separate but equal.
</span>Speaker 4: Governments derive their powers from the consent of the <span>people.
The </span><span>Baron de Montesquieu would most likely agree with the Speaker 3, as it was Montesquieu who theorize first that a government should be divided into branches that are separated but equal (the three branches should be executive, legislative and judiciary), in order to avoid that one of the three could acquire more power than the other and as a form of control of democracy.</span>
Explanation:
B is the most realistic thing a Karen would do, but C would seem like the most fun option to get back at Karen. Hope that helps! :)
