There are actually <u>over</u> AN infinite possible scenarios..
But I'm assuming just 2-
One that he doesn't have a parachute
And the other that he does
Explanation:
- Assuming he had no parachute (during the freefall)- he would, in all odds, learn to fly and probably be the first human to do so.
- Whilst in the other case, he would perhaps land normally (and boringly).
This is an example or description of "a<span>rgument against the person, abusive".</span>
It is a wrong
argumentative methodology whereby original discourse of the current subject is dodged
by rather assaulting the character, intention, or other quality of the
individual making the contention, or people related with the contention, as
opposed to countering the substance of the contention itself. Usually known as “Ad
hominem”.
Im pretty sure the answer is A but somebody check me if im wrong
Answer:gently making fun of common human quirks
Explanation:
Even though someone may have a right to speak in public however every right is accompanied by the responsibility.
It is your responsibility to ensure that your right does not affect someone else's right .
Obscene langauge can't be an acceptable langauge to be used in public and using negative stereotypes may cause serious conflict in the society and anything that disrupt peace within society may not be used just for fun.
With the invention of the stethoscope, physicians were able to listen to the various sounds made by the heart and lungs. And began to be able to identify if patients had any diseases or ailments.
