Answer:
Answer is gathering evidence
Explanation:
gathering evidence is taking notes and allows you to do the three other things such as organizing ideas, developing a topic and writing a thesis.
1. french
2. italian
3. japanese
4. spanish
Answer:
b. social distinctions were more blurred than in europe.
Explanation:
<u>British taxes practically caused the revolution of the colonies</u>, therefore option "A" is not the correct answer.
That various religious and ethnic groups coexisted in the American colonies was no reason for colonists to tend to support British royalty (D).<em> In fact, diversity and immigration were one of the reasons why the thirteen colonies flourished so quickly.</em>
The colonists didn´t feel that British royalty did anything for them as they had to survive on their own, dedicating themselves mainly to agriculture. <u>The difference in wealth between the inhabitants of England and the colonists was very large, therefore the colonists did not feel entitled to the rights of English citizens (C). Not because the American colonies had a great diversity of religious and ethnic groups.</u>
Because the American colonies were home to diverse religious and ethnic groups, social distinctions were more blurred than in Europe (B). In New England, diversity was ironically the point in common that its inhabitants had and that would lead them to fight for their independence.
<span>When people group several concepts together, such as baseball, basketball, and football, based on the shared property of being ball sports, they are creating a CATEGORY of the concept
category of a concept refers to shared similarities that more than one objects have with one another. Another example of this is when people group several animals such as lion, wolf, and bear based on their danger.</span>
Answer:
"In international environmental agreements, the idea that scientific uncertainty should not be used as an excuse for inaction is known as:" <u>The precautionary approach.</u>
Explanation:
The precautionary approach is ability to asserts that the burden of proof for potentially harmful actions by industry or government rests on the assurance of safety. And that, when there are threats of serious damages, scientific uncertainty must be resolved in favor of prevention.
