Answer:
I would.
Explanation:
Saving the environment is really important. The only downside would be only being able to use it during the day.
<span> For a start, when you have a question that needs answering in science, you formulate a null hypothesis. That is a negative statement which you then set out to prove or disprove. This is just a convention. So if your initial question is for example, "Does sugar dissolve in water?"
Your null hypothesis will be "Sugar does not dissolve in water."
You then set up your experiment and get some data.
Now if your data doesn't support your null hypothesis then you reject it and make the statement ,"Sugar does dissolve in water." As you can see from this simple example, a non-result is still a result so the idea of formulating new tests as mentioned by another answerer isn't necessary and in some ways is the incorrect thing to do. In science, hypotheses are often not supported by data and i would argue that this is the case a lot of the time. A non-result is still a result and you will have plenty to write about whichever way it goes. </span>
The nitrogenous base found in DNA but not RNA is called thymine. That's what it bonds to.
Answer:
This was the only treatment options adopted for the Ebola in 1995 in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The assumption was that immune response is generated by the virus in the WBC of the infected individuals. These response produce antibodies.
A total if 8 patients were transfused with these blood contained antibodies, but one of these died, the remaining 7 patients survived.
The antibodies were believed to have multiplied(produced b-cells) to neutralize the Ebola virus(antigens) and to ensure the survival of the patients
Explanation:
Steriodal//topical???
Sorry if i didn’t help :(
