There are all sorts of ways to reconstruct the history of life on Earth. Pinning down when specific events occurred is often tricky, though. For this, biologists depend mainly on dating the rocks in which fossils are found, and by looking at the “molecular clocks” in the DNA of living organisms.
There are problems with each of these methods. The fossil record is like a movie with most of the frames cut out. Because it is so incomplete, it can be difficult to establish exactly when particular evolutionary changes happened.
Modern genetics allows scientists to measure how different species are from each other at a molecular level, and thus to estimate how much time has passed since a single lineage split into different species. Confounding factors rack up for species that are very distantly related, making the earlier dates more uncertain.
These difficulties mean that the dates in the timeline should be taken as approximate. As a general rule, they become more uncertain the further back along the geological timescale we look. Dates that are very uncertain are marked with a question mark.
Answer:
The celebrity of the defendant, the other major players, and the case itself had, and continues to have, society as a whole discussing domestic violence and the effectiveness of our laws that deal with this area of criminal law. Since the commission of the crimes in June of 1994, the Simpson' case brought to the forefront the issue of what role evidence of prior domestic violence should play in criminal prosecutions. In addition to the forensic evidence which the Los Angeles prosecutors relied upon to attempt to convict Mr. Simpson, the theory of the prosecution's case rested on the proposition that Mr. Simpson committed the murders against his former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson (hereinafter Ms. Brown), and her friend, Ronald Goldman, because of jealousy, obsession, and the need to dominate Ms. Brown. The prosecution's case rested entirely upon circumstantial evidence, and as such, the prosecutors sought to introduce evidence of Mr. Simpson's past abusive conduct toward Ms. Brown to establish the identity of the perpetrator and his motives to commit the brutal crimes. The prosecution argued that the history of domestic violence and prior threats were probative evidence of Mr. Simpson's motive, intent, plan, and identity as the killer. According to Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti, the trial judge's ruling on the admissibility of this evidence was the "most critical ruling" that the Court would make in the case The prior conduct which the prosecution wanted to introduce on its direct case included acts of physical beatings upon Ms. Brown by Mr. Simpson, some of which were documented by photographs showing Ms. Brown's injuries. Other incidents included an episode in which Mr. Simpson had thrown Ms. Brown out of a moving car; a 1989 assault for which Ms. Brown had been hospitalized due to her injuries; Mr. Simpson's 1989 no contest plea to spousal abuse for which he was ordered to undergo counseling and pay a fine; letters of apology for the abuse written by Mr. Simpson to Ms. Brown; Mr. Simpson's repeated threats to kill Ms. Brown; a 1993 recording of a "911" telephone call made by Ms. Brown to the police, during which the voice of Mr. Simpson was heard making threats and shouting obscenities at Ms. Brown; evidence that Mr. Simpson was stalking Ms. Brown, and that shortly before her death, Ms. Brown had made contact with a battered women's shelter help-line; and many other instances of actual and threatened violence committed by Mr. Simpson against Ms. Brown dating back to 1977. In January 1995, Judge Lance Ito, who presided over the murder trial, ruled that much of the domestic violence history would be admissible on the prosecution's direct case, including the 1993 "911" tape-recorded telephone call by Ms. Brown. The evidence was admitted to provide the jury with an appreciation of the "nature and quality" of the relationship between Mr. Simpson anji Ms. Brown, and to aid in establishing motive, intent, plan, and identity of the killer.
Answer:
sour, corrosive
Explanation:
An acid is a substance that donates hydrogen ions. Because of this, in an acidic solution there are more hydrogen ions than hydroxide ions. This means the more acidic a food is, the more hydrogen ions are available to trigger the sour taste receptors. A base is a substance that accepts hydrogen ions.
Yes it is absolutely true that each lung is fed oxygen by a separate bronchus. There are actually two lungs and two bronchi. Each of the two lungs are safeguarded by the two ribcages as
they are placed within the rib cages. The lungs actually consists of elastic
sacs that contract and expand for taking in and releasing air. This way oxygen
is passed into the blood and carbon dioxide is taken out from the blood and
passed out. This is also the main function of the lungs.
