D is the answer I believe
There are many reasons for the non-development of industries and factories in Mahalaxmi municipality, one of them is a lower population of about 112,000 people.
Other reasons that are associated with the non-development of industries and factories include the following:
- Low investments from wealthy individuals associated with the town.
- Neglects from the government.
- The location of the Mahalaxmi municipality.
- The conception of Mahalaxmi municipality as a local area.
- The size of the area is less than 30km².
- And the general poverty level of India as a nation.
Hence, in this case, it is concluded that Mahalaxmi municipality is generally a small town.
Learn more here: brainly.com/question/19330658
Answer: C In a 100-meter race, two of Amy's co-participants won Silver and Bronze and she performed exceedingly well; it follows that Amy won Gold.
Explanation:
There is a flaw in the evidence presented by the lawyer, several flaws actually:
- The client could have been the culprit and left the main door and garage open as an alibi.
- There is no mention of there being an altercation with a thief that cost the wife her life.
- There is no mention of things being stolen to prove that it was a thief.
The attorney used one logic and deduced a flawed conclusion from it so the option that is similar has to do the same as the above.
Option A is not applicable here as blame was taken by the perpetrator.
Option B is not flawed as one would be expected to be late in such circumstances.
Option C has a flaw because performing exceedingly well is relative. Amy could simply be performing exceedingly well in relation to past races. Amy's co-participants could have performed even better which is why they won medals and while Amy performed exceedingly well by her standards, it was not enough to win a medal.
Option D has no flaw. It is a logical deduction and argument just like option E.
Many things including protests
Alissa is memorizing her grocery list: Eggs, bacon, sugar, apples, bread, hamburger, pop tarts, carrots, chicken, tea, eggplant,
pashok25 [27]
Answer:
The ones at the end.
Explanation:
The recency effect is a memory effect that occurs when more recent information is better remembered than does earlier-presented information.
This effect says that people tend to have a <u>better memory for information they were told more recently.</u>
This effect is the opposite of the primacy effect which refers to the tendency to recall information presented at the start of a list better than information at the middle or end.
Since Alissa is memorizing her grocery list, <u>according to the recency effect she will have a better memory for the items that she saw more recentl</u>y, thus, this would mean, t<u>he terms at the end of the list.</u> (as opposed to the primacy effect where she would recall the first ones)
