GMOs have a ton of pros and cons, so it's hard to say. Although, I personally would like to avoid them. With the amount of people who have gone gluten free, there's more of a reason for it than being a hipster or a yuppie. Because the demand for wheat is so high, we had to genetically modify it. Although this increased its abundance, a lot of humans' digestive systems haven't evolved with it. That is the reason why it makes so many people sick, because they cant digest it. If the rate at which GMOs are being created and nourished continues, it's likely our digestive systems will reject it, possibly causing famine due to the inability to eat our own food.<span />
Answer:
Dependent Variable: Babies that use the formula
Independent Variable: Babies Without the formula
Explanation:
As the formula dose Increases, So does the weight of the babies (figurativly)
This is the Dependent variable because it depends on another factor
The Independent variable doesn't depend on the amount of formula taken because it doesn't use the formula, therefore it doesn't depend on anything, its Independent.
The two richest ecosystems lie in tropical rainforests and coral reefs. On land, tropical rainforests contain many species variation with an abundance of species in bird, mammals, amphibians, and plants. While tropical rainforests occupy only 7 percent of the Earth’s land area, they contain over half of the world’s species. This may be because species richness tends to increase with decreased elevation, increasing solar exposure, and increased precipitation; that is, hot, rainy low-land areas have the most species. In contrast, deserts have low species variation because of low precipitation. On earth, water is majorly important the equation for life. Many of the species are genetically isolated because of habitat size and variation in the build of the land (mountains, equator location, etc) such as seen in the Galapagos islands and the Amazon rainforest, both near and in South America.
Hope this helps!
<span> For a start, when you have a question that needs answering in science, you formulate a null hypothesis. That is a negative statement which you then set out to prove or disprove. This is just a convention. So if your initial question is for example, "Does sugar dissolve in water?"
Your null hypothesis will be "Sugar does not dissolve in water."
You then set up your experiment and get some data.
Now if your data doesn't support your null hypothesis then you reject it and make the statement ,"Sugar does dissolve in water." As you can see from this simple example, a non-result is still a result so the idea of formulating new tests as mentioned by another answerer isn't necessary and in some ways is the incorrect thing to do. In science, hypotheses are often not supported by data and i would argue that this is the case a lot of the time. A non-result is still a result and you will have plenty to write about whichever way it goes. </span>
