Answer:
The question is vary small.
Step-by-step explanation:
I can't see it.
Answer:
Option B is the correct answer.
Explanation:
Current number of butterflies in the park = 20 thousand.
Rate of increase of butterfly population = 4% = 0.04
The population of butterfly after 1 year = 20+0.04*20 = 20*1.04
The population of butterfly after 2 years = 20*1.04 + 20*1.04*0.04 = 20*1.04*1.04
The population of butterfly after 3 years = 20*1.04*1.04 + 20*1.04*1.04*0.04 = 20*1.04*1.04*1.04
So, population of butterfly after n years = 20*(1.04*1.04*1.04* .... n times)

Option B is the correct answer.
Answer:
b. We have very strong evidence that the long-run average guess of the population size of Milwaukee, Wisconsin is smaller with the anchor of Green Bay than with the anchor of Chicago.
Step-by-step explanation:
Smaller p-value indicates a strong evidence in favor of the alternative hypothesis which means we can reject the null hypothesis. In the given scenario the p-value is 0.0001 which is very small. There is sufficient evidence for the rejection of null hypothesis.
Answer:
the first one: Valido’s Conduct under Review
the second: by removing “unpopular” and “conservative”
the third: by adding a comment from Republican senator