Hello. This question is incomplete. The full question is:
"While exploring a rock formation, Hiroto finds a rock that has footprints pressed into it. A geologist tells Hiroto that the rock is millions of years old. Which of these statements is correct about Hiroto’s find?
A.It is not a fossil, because footprints are not fossils. B.It is not a fossil, because only whole organisms are fossils. C.It is a fossil only if Hiroto finds actual parts of the organism in rocks nearby. D.It is a fossil because footprints of organisms from million of years ago are considered to be fossils.
"
Answer:
D.It is a fossil because footprints of organisms from million of years ago are considered to be fossils.
Explanation:
Fossils are body remains of animals and plants trapped in rocks for thousands of years. These traces can be parts of the body, body structure, tracks, footprints, among others. An example of this can be seen in the question above, where Hiroto found a mark caused by an animal on a rock. In short, Hiroto found a rock with pressed footprints that is approximately millions of years old. He found a fossil.
Receivers with high involvement and high need for cognition. The elaboration likelihood model (ELM) of influence is a double procedure hypothesis portraying the change of states of mind from. The ELM was produced by Richard E. Frivolous and John Cacioppo in 1986. The model expects to clarify diverse methods for preparing boosts, why they are utilized, and their results on state of mind change.
Answer: Branch office manager
Explanation:
According to FINRA rules and regulations, any error or alterations to an order tickets are highly prohibited. Such alterations should be directed (in writing) to a designated person which is the Branch Office Manager.
The branch office manager must be informed about the reasons those alterations were made. Also, the branch office manager could approve of such alterations and be accountable for the change.
The Branch office manager will conduct a thorough assessment to understand the facts surrounding the alterations before issuing an approval.
Answer:
The following explains the outcome and significance of the District of Columbia v. Heller case,
The Supreme Court decided in favor of Heller, that the Second Amendment allows law-abiding U.S. citizens to own and carry handguns in the district.
Explanation: In the 2008 landmark Supreme Court Case The District of Columbia v. Heller, it was found that the Second Amendment allows LAW ABIDING citizens to own and carry handguns in the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). This case found the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975 as unconstitutional. The Act of 1975 called for handguns used for home and self defense to be unloaded, disassembled, and/or locked.
Once I asked, “Who was Adam Smith's best friend? ... When David Ricardo or John Stuart Mill or Robert Torrens adopted a theory of ... In his ordinary state of health, strength and spirits; in the ordinary ...
