Answer:
A. Writing that is a product of a writer's imagination, and an invention instead of actual fact or history
Explanation:
Option A is the correct answer.
It is the traditional, and perhaps inaccurate or misleading idea, of what nonfiction writing is.
Nonfiction writing is the type of writing that has to do with actual and factual events or situations that written to inform or inspire readers. Fiction writing is the writing that has to do with the imagination. It is usually unreal and non-factual.
Saying that nonfiction is the writing that is a product of the writer's imagination is misleading and inaccurate.
I don’t know what book your talking about.
Answer:<u><em> A judgment is a court order that is the decision in a lawsuit.</em></u>
Explanation: It is. <u><em>"If"</em></u> a judgment is entered against you, a debt collector will have stronger tools, like garnishment, to collect the debt. Also is an official result of a lawsuit in court. <u><em>Ignore the lawsuit, or. Don't respond to the lawsuit in a timely manner.</em></u> I'm not claming this is mine and it belongs to their rightful owner..I copied and pasted your question on Google- <3 >W<"
Correct answer # 2: The world's nations must cooperate; one nation cannot solve the world's problems by itself.
When you connect two related independent clauses or sentences you use a semicolon. Both sentences should be completed grammarly writtend and with a connection. Make sure you do not write a capital letter after the semicolon, unless it is a proper name.
Answer # 3 is incorrect as there is a capitalized word
Answer # 1 it is incorrect to use "for" as the sentence is grammarly completed
Hello. This question is incomplete. The full question is:
Kalani and lael are students who have been comparing the total kinetic energy of an iceberg to an ice cube
Kalani’s Argument: My claim is that an iceberg has more total kinetic energy (thermal energy) than an ice cube. This is because even though an iceberg is about the same temperature as an ice cube, it is also much larger, so it is made of a lot more molecules. For this reason, an iceberg will have more total kinetic energy (thermal energy) than an ice cube.
Lael's Argument: An iceberg has more total kinetic energy (thermal energy) than an ice cube because it is larger and made of more molecules. This matters because molecules move, and moving things have kinetic energy, so each molecule adds its kinetic energy to the total. Since the iceberg and the ice cube are around the same temperature, the fact that the iceberg has extra molecules means that it will have more total kinetic energy (thermal energy).
Which argument is more convincing?
Answer:
Kalani's argument is more convincing.
Explanation:
Lael says that the fact that Icebrg has extra molecules means that it has greater kinetic energy and this is not true, since the kinetic energy is greater in bodies and objects that have greater speed. In addition, speed increases as a body has greater mass. In this case, we can consider Kalani's argument as more convincing, since she related the kinetic energy to the mass of the iceberg.
