Answer:
See explanation for answer.
Explanation:
I have learned many things throughout my past in order to have a successful Junior year. All of my past years of school and academics have taught me what I need to know no knowledge-wise. My family has supported me and helped me throughout my years of schooling. My emotional well-being is at its best, I am ready to start this new year and finish it amazingly. My physical well-being is fantastic, thanks to my P.E classes and my at-home workout I look and feel great.
I don't know if this is exactly what you were looking for but I hope it helps!
Have a lovely night!
Answer:
i dont think anybody would do that for 5 points
Explanation:
Answer:
I think this argument is really convincing.
<u><em>Reason # 1:</em></u>
All of the people will be benefited from Jobs Bill.
<u><em>Reason # 2:</em></u>
The argument seems to be really convincing because all points of the speech are surrounding one main point that is welfare of the people and helping them get out of poverty.
<u><em>Reason # 3:</em></u>
People will also like it and convinced from it because they find out that doing Jobs, there would be no more poverty and they will at least receive money to feed their family.
Answer:
C. The scientist's conclusion is flawed because the number of hours of sunlight changed and, therefore, the experiment is not controlled.
Explanation:
A controlled experiment is an experiment used to test a single variable at a time. The variable that is being tested is called the independent variable, and it is directly manipulated by a scientist. The rest of the variables need to remain unchanged in order not to get wrong results like the scientist in the given scenario.
As the scientist is trying to see how gamma rays affect marigolds, only the gamma ray exposure is supposed to change throughout the experiment. The amount of water remained the same, but the number of hours of sunlight didn't. That's why we don't know what exactly affected the growth of marigolds - the sunlight or the gamma rays? And that's why the scientist's conclusion is flawed.
