<u>Answer:</u>
C- The water was a constant shallow sea during that time.
This was happened to the Grand Canyon area during the Permian Age.
<u>Explanation:</u>
The Grand canyon consists of the most studied sequence and complete rock on earth. They are nearly 200 million to 2 billion of years old, of which most of them were deposited in shallow, warm seas and near the ancient and the sea shores which were long gone.
The youngest formation of rock in the grand canyon is the Kaibab Limestone, which was laid down during the Permian age by the advancing warm and shallow sea. Although, the areas climate has been changing constantly during recent times from cool and wet pluvial to semi arid conditions. And also, with less water to cut, the erosion has also reduced greatly.
Answer:
The correct answer is B, <em>they struggled for control of the Middle East</em>.
Explanation:
The history of the relationship between the Ottomans and Safavids is mainly characterized by their conflicts for the control of different regions of the Middle East. All the other options don't correctly describe this history.
However, because both societies were Muslim according to Islam they couldn't war against each other unless it was for religious reasons.
Thus in the early 1500s Selim I, sultan of the Ottoman Empire consulted his scholars and decided that the Shah Ismail of the Safavids preached heresies against Islam. He then persecuted internal supporters of the Safavids which intensified the rivalry between the two empires.
The conflict between Ottomans and Safavids was fought also through trade embargoes in the 1500s. Ottomans imposed trade embargoes against the Safavids but they only worked until the early 1600s. In the 18th century, they would start to see themselves all parts of the same faith but still fearing each other.
It was known as the Manhattan Project
Answer:
The Supreme Court decision that decided the 2000 Presidential Election should go down in history as one of the court's most ill-conceived judgments. In issuing its poorly-reasoned ruling in Bush v. Gore, the court majority unnecessarily exposed itself to charges of partisanship and risked undermining the court's stature as an independent, impartial arbiter of the law. Although the court majority correctly identified constitutional problems in the specific recount proceedings ordered by the Florida Supreme Court, the decision to end all recount attempts did immeasurable damage to the equal protection rights the court claimed to be guarding, since it favored a convenient and timely tabulation of ballots over an accurate recording of the vote. In the controversy that followed this decision, some critics of the majority decision argued that the court had no business taking on Bush v. Gore in the first place, that it should have remained solely within the Florida courts (Ginsburg, J. [Dissent] Bush v. Gore [2000]). This paper will argue that the court was correct to intervene but that umm the resulting decision was flawed and inconsistent, with potentially serious, adverse implications for the Federal judiciary if the court continues to issue rulings in this way.
Explanation:
Answer:
i think its a)human capital i might be wrong tho
Explanation:
