False. In fact, whoever wrote that paper could be accused of plagiarism. A complete source is important.
Answer:
end the game for good
Explanation:
I read the passage awhile back
Answer: curled
Explanation:
the subject is the dog, and the predicate is stating a action of the subject (DOG)
B) It is unnecessary to oversee the athletes involved in mixed martial arts.
The viewpoint made in section one is that "State athletic commissions should strictly monitor and regulate the UFC." A rebuttal statement is one that goes against the viewpoint, so it needs to say something about how the UFC should not be monitored or regulated. Option A agrees with the viewpoint by saying overseeing athletes is necessary. Option B states the opposite by saying it is unnecessary to oversee athletes. Therefore, this is the correct answer. Option C says that athletes must self-regulate. While this puts the responsibility of regulating on the athletes, it does not take it away from the commissions. There is nothing here to suggest that the commissions would not regulate just because the athletes are. Option D has nothing to do with monitoring or regulating so it is a poor choice.
Answer:
State your claim very often when writing and very vividly
Explanation:
