Answer:
Yes.
Explanation:
Any source in History can be biased. It can be based on personal opinion, pressure, etc.
Let's take an example. Let's say we want to learn more about Hitler, and we have a primary source that we are analysing. The primary source is a diary entry from a Nazi propagandist, and in the diary entry he talks about how Hitler is like a reincarnation of God, he will lead Germany and the world to greatness and is all in all a great guy.
Straight away, you can tell that that is biased.
So to summarise, anything can be biased. It isn't related to what type of source it is. If you want to analyse and interpret sources, you will need to have lots of different primary and secondary sources at hand, and compare them to find the best answer and analysis.
Hope this helps
Answer:
Changes in rainfall and temperature affect not just whether crops are abundant at harvest, but also whether they live that long. ... Published in the journal Nature Climate Change, suggests that an increase in temperature of 1 degree Celsius in Mato Grosso will lead to a 9-13% reduction in soy and corn production.
Explanation:
:)
<span>A central bank was needed to prevent future panics.</span>
Positive effects it gave us a way to spread our political beliefs. But at the same time it made people start fights because they did not feel the same about certain things so it created conflicts against people. But the good part about it is that it created a way people could spread their political beliefs and share their thoughts with others.
