Explanation:
1. Peter didn't break that bottle
2. They are not learning English in the room.
3. Something changed my mind.
4. Some one had told me about it.
5. I know her telephone number.
6. My students will not bring the children home.
7. They did not send me a present last week.
8. She didn't give us more information
9 The chief engineer wasn't instructing all the workers of the plan.
10 They can make tea with cold water.
I think that's right !!!
Answer:
1: Tubman was a great leader who sacrificed her life to save those of others. She was an amazing person in general and did good in various ways. One way she promoted good was by helping others.
2: Americans can do their research and talk about the lesser-known heroes in school, out of school, at work, out of work, etc. They could also send letters to officials to make them more largely known. I think that many heroes end up going unnoticed because people nowadays are more into celebreties rather than other people who helped their communities.
Explanation:
Good luck!
Answer:
You could just steal the slogan from Philippine Airlines: "It's more fun in the Philippines!" and then like elaborate. It would be more like an infographic than a slogan poster, but I mean whatever works. Or you could say "Las Pilipinas: Kay Ganda at Masaya!" (it's supposed to say the philippines: so beautiful and fun, but idrk cuz my mom's the one who is filipino and speaks tagalog not me)
Answer:
Stick Bug. Stick bugs are perhaps one of the better known examples of insect mimicry. Commonly referred to as walking sticks, stick insects began imitating plants as early as 126 million years ago. Their twig-like appearance helps to defend them against predators that hunt by sight.It is common to see them walk in a swaying motion, pretending to be a twig caught by the wind. Other stick insect species have lichen-like outgrowths on their bodies that help camouflage them on tree bark. ... Echolocation used by bats can help them hone in on the tiny noises made by stick insects for a tasty meal.
Explanation:
Answer:
This case involves a federal death sentence imposed on defendant-appellant Fields for conviction of a federal capital offense. Fields was sentenced to death largely on the basis of the opinion of a psychiatrist who stated that he could confidently predict Fields would be dangerous in the future. The psychiatrist testified that he did not know of any "standard psychiatric or medical procedures used in arriving at a determination or predicting future dangerousness" and that he was unaware of specific empirical data or studies. He issued his opinion without engaging in any testing or any other objective measures or use of an actuarial method. His basis for this opinion was discussions with the prosecutors and review of some records regarding the defendant. The defense attorney objected to the testimony as unreliable under the standards for expert testimony established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceutical (i.e., that proffered evidence must be grounded in scientific reasoning or methodology). The district court overruled the objections and allowed the expert testimony to go to the jury.
Explanation:
