Melted plate material reappears by way of volcanoes
The sentence that can be removed <u>without affecting the explanation</u> is "<em>In the 1800s, the United States was still a very young nation, trying to solidify its identity</em>."
The reason this sentence can be removed is that it does not offer any necessary information to the explanation. The passage is about how technology leads to bigger cities. This information is conveyed just as efficiently without the need for the first sentence.
Rather than serving to offer information, the first sentence in the passage serves as a sort of <u>introduction</u> to the text. The very next sentence can just as easily serve as an intro to the passage while providing context for the development of early technology that led to the industrial revolution.
For these reasons, the sentence "<em>In the 1800s, the United States was still a very young nation, trying to solidify its identity</em>." can easily be removed from the passage <u>without affecting</u> the explanation.
To learn more visit:
brainly.com/question/816588?referrer=searchResults
Answer:
Explanation:
Summary:
In “The Piece of String,” the story would be very different if told from
the point of view of the farm hand who actually found the wallet. He
would most likely be shocked and concerned that the old man was taking
such grief for something he did not do. It also would have changed the
end of the story.
This is More Detailed:
Maitre Malandain probably does not truly believe that Maitre Hauchcorne has stolen the wallet, but having "the tendency to hold grudges," he takes advantage of an opportunity to deal misery to his foe.
Just as Saki satirized those of the Edwardian Age in England, Guy de Maupassant mocked the pettiness of the peasantry of Normandy, a province in northwestern France. In the exposition of his story, Maupassant describes the Norman women in the market who stubbornly held to their prices in the market and would only relent when a customer began to walk away. Then, they would shout after him or her, "All right...It's yours."
It is this same obstinate and petty...
Part A: B AquAdvantage salmon has DNA from other fish that lets it grow faster and in different conditions than regular Atlantic salmon.
The entire text talks about how these genetically modified salmon could be a better food source if it was approved by the FDA. One of the reasons is because it grows faster and in different conditions so it is easier farm.
Part B: C Paragraph 14
This paragraph supports part A because it specifies that the AquAdvantage salmon can grow to full size in half the time of Atlantic salmon.
3. D The FDA temporarily reversed its approval of transgenic salmon as food after listening to public concerns.
Originally the FDA, after extensive research, decided the genetically modified salmon was safe to eat and not harmful to the environment as long as it was farmed in facilities and not released in the wild. The text then goes on to say, "But so many people objected that the FDA decided to reconsider its decision." The other statements are simply incorrect.
4. C They show that people already eat genetically modified plant food without any issues or protest.
In the paragraphs, it explains that people in Canada are already eating some genetically modified food such as "tomatoes, corn, soya, canola, squash, milk products and other foods".
