not sure if this helps but I hope it does
sorry its so long
To date erosion scientists have failed to address — or have addressed inadequately — some of the ‘big questions’ of our discipline. For example, where is erosion occurring? Why is it happening, and who is to blame? How serious is it? Who does it affect? What should be the response? Can we prevent it? What are the costs of erosion? Our inability or reluctance to answer such questions damages our credibility and is based on weaknesses in commonly-used approaches and the spatial and temporal scales at which much research is carried out. We have difficulty in the recognition, description and quantification of erosion, and limited information on the magnitude and frequency of events that cause erosion. In particular there has been a neglect of extreme events which are known to contribute substantially to total erosion. The inadequacy and frequent misuse of existing data leaves us open to the charge of exaggeration of the erosion problem (a la Lomborg).
Models need to be developed for many purposes and at many scales. Existing models have proved to be of limited value, in the real as opposed to the academic world, both because of problems with the reliability of their results, and difficulties (with associated costs) of acquiring suitable data. However, there are some positive signs: models are now being developed for purposes including addressing questions of off-site impacts and land-use policy. Cheap, reliable and technically simple methods of erosion assessment at the field scale are needed. At the global scale, an up-date of GLASOD based on a scientific approach is urgent so that we are at least able to identify erosion ‘hotspots’.
In terms of explanation of erosion, the greatest need is for a full recognition of the importance of socio-economic drivers. The accession of new countries to the EU with different economic and land-use histories emphasises this need. Too often we have left people, especially the farmers, out of the picture. Our approach could be characterised as ‘data-rich and people-poor’.
<span><em>i</em>nterests should be free to compete with each other for governmental influence.</span>
Answer:
To show the public what we have discovered, what went extinct, the effect on the Planet Humans had, and to show what could happen in the future if we don’t change. But to mainly show old animals fossils and tools we’ve discovered.
Explanation:
Answer: A presidential democracy modeled closely on the United States.
Explanation:
The American government believed that establishing democracy in Japan involved change in all areas of Japanese life. Under MacArthur and with the cooperation of the Japanese, Japan undertook tremendous changes in just seven short years — the Occupation lasted from 1945 to 1952.
Answer:
To prevent the government from becoming tyrannical.
Explanation:
The Articles of confederation was made by the founding fathers to specifically created a system of government that stray away form the tyrannical nature of Monarchy.
The founding fathers believe that if the power in the government is held by one king, there's nothing the people can really do if that King start abusing his power.
This is why the founding fathers did not granted the federal government enough power. They wanted the people to have every opportunity to overturn the government in case the federal government start abusing the power.
