Answer:
I believe the options are:
(A) All these decisions by public officials and businesses are aimed at one goal: slowing down the spread of the virus to avoid overburdening a health care system that doesn't have the infrastructure to handle a sudden surge of tens of thousands of cases at once.
(B) Epidemiologists study diseases and how they spread. They can somewhat predict how many cases of a disease are going to occur based on how the disease is behaving.
(C) The only reason total U.S. cases aren't already skyrocketing is that coronavirus testing has been such a mess that too few people — just 77 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the whole week of March 8 — are being tested. You can't count cases you haven't identified yet.
(D) But every indication is that the United States is on track to see the same exponential increase other countries are seeing, as scientist Mark Handley has been tracking on Twitter.
Explanation:
Flattening the curve basically means to lessen the pressure on the healthcare system by employing precautionary measures against the coronavirus. These, as you might already be aware, include hand washing, use of face masks, sanitizers, gloves and staying at home to prevent catching the infection.
Without protective measures, the number of cases will increase exponentially, ultimately overburdening the healthcare system. There won't be enough doctors, nurses or medical equipment to cater to the patients.
First you have to find evidence to what you're gonna say, make sure your grammar is right as well.
The correct answer to which logical fallacy appears in the passage "If I let you turn in your assignment late, then you won't understand the importance of deadlines. Then you won't be able to get into college and get a good job" is when the speaker states the second sentence, following the previous one with the connector "then", which expresses continuity in time, <em>consequence, "after that"</em>. So, the reader can infer that the second sentence is a natural consequence of the first one, something that would happen subsequently naturally, which configures a logical fallacy.
A logical fallacy is <em>the wrong use of reasoning, a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which invalids the argument.</em> A fallacy usually <em>seems better than it really is </em>and some of them are committed intentionally to manipulate. Fallacies <em>intend to mislead in order to make false inferences seem real.</em>
<em>Nothing can lead the speaker to deduct that if a person doesn't understand the importance of a deadline, it would be a following natural consequence that this same person would be unable to get into college or get a good job.</em> What would determine if a person is able to get into college are <em>several other skill parameters and circumstances</em>. Not understanding the importance of a deadline <em>doesn't lead one to fail the attempt of getting into college</em>, nor it determines if a person will or will not get a good job.
Answer:
www.education.gov
Explanation:
this should be the correct answer.
Please give me brainliest.
The correct answer is option 4) "put sentence 3 after sentence 5". The passage entitled "The Origin of Movies" explains some of the early developments in cinema that led to its great expansion among the masses. By putting sentence 3 after sentence 5, the flow in the text would be more logical because sentence 4 talks about 1902 while sentence 3 talks about 1910, and because sentence 3 states that going to the movies started to be a global pastime and sentence 6 states that "The era of mass entertainment was under way".
