One is bad and one is good.
<span><span> http://prntscr.com/aayp83
30/4
I made a 8 sets of 4 cells.
8 x 4 = 32
I shaded 30 cells. 30/4 shows 7 sets of 4 cells fully shaded and the 8th set shaded 2 cells out of 4 cells.
30/4 = 7 2/4 or 7 1/2
</span>
<span>
</span>
<span>
</span></span>
by praising the efficiency of modern-day Internet research doesn't relate to anything regarding "Choreographers of Matter, Life, and Intelligence" when it comes to argumentation. Comparing scientific knowledge to grains of sand on a beach is poetic, but it is no argument either. Proving names of modern scientists and their contributions also shows nothing but the scientists and their contributions themselves. It doesn't work as proof for <em>"an impending scientific revolution".</em>
What Michio Kaku does, as the good scientist that he is, is to show evidence. And he does so "by providing quantitative proof of recent scientific progress"
<span>C) poor and working class citizens.</span>
