Answer: Weathering processes are driven by four main forms of energy: gravity, orogenic energy, solar energy and anthropogenic energy [1]. Gravity influences all movements of solid, liquid and gaseous materials.
The two major sources of energy for the rock cycle are also shown; the sun provides energy for surface processes such as weathering, erosion, and transport, and the Earth's internal heat provides energy for processes like subduction, melting, and metamorphism.
The rock cycle illustrates steps involved in the formation of one type of rock from another. It is a system that has operated since the Earth's origin, and it continues today. The energy that drives weathering and erosion, melting, or an increase in heat or pressure drives the continuation of the rock cycle.
Explanation: I have more answers if you want/need them
Answer:
A
Explanation:
So hurling means "To throw" so if its an antonym this it would have to be the opposite of that, therefore if would be A. Stopping
Answer:
Letter of apology to a friend after a quarrel.
Explanation:
ABC Avenue
Indianapolis
Indiana
Dear Shawn,
I know I have said that I will never talk to you again after our huge fight. But I have also had time to reconsider the situation and gone over it numerous times. And one thing I have realized is that the fight, or for that matter, anything, is not worth ending my friendship with my friend.
I admit the fight was violent and raw. But through it all, I have ignored the times you have stuck by me even during the worst of times. And for that, I am grateful and also regretful about the fight at the same time.
So, here is my apology letter, asking you to forgive whatever I had done to you and also to forgive me for all the hurtful things I've said. I have overstepped my boundaries and would like to admit my fault.
So, please accept my sincerest apology and give me another chance to get your friendship. I will make sure to not do it again and prove my loyalty to our friendship more.
I am deeply sorry.
Forgive me.
I will be awaiting your reply.
Sincerely.
Jake.
Answer:
This case involves a federal death sentence imposed on defendant-appellant Fields for conviction of a federal capital offense. Fields was sentenced to death largely on the basis of the opinion of a psychiatrist who stated that he could confidently predict Fields would be dangerous in the future. The psychiatrist testified that he did not know of any "standard psychiatric or medical procedures used in arriving at a determination or predicting future dangerousness" and that he was unaware of specific empirical data or studies. He issued his opinion without engaging in any testing or any other objective measures or use of an actuarial method. His basis for this opinion was discussions with the prosecutors and review of some records regarding the defendant. The defense attorney objected to the testimony as unreliable under the standards for expert testimony established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceutical (i.e., that proffered evidence must be grounded in scientific reasoning or methodology). The district court overruled the objections and allowed the expert testimony to go to the jury.
Explanation:
