• anonymous
isabella works for an environmental safety group. Her group wants to answer the question "to what lengths must we go to protect plants and animals?" Why is her group's research question flawed?
  • katieb
See more answers at
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.

Get this expert

answer on brainly


Get your free account and access expert answers to this
and thousands of other questions

  • anonymous
These are the answers choices: A.The question is based on their bias as members of an environmental group. B.The study can only be based on observation with this question. C.They are trying to answer an ethical question, not a scientific one. D.They will never be able to determine a means of protecting plants and animals. I really need help.
  • TranceNova
Wow I see what you mean, that is a tough question. Lets see.. A. well this is pretty true, not sure if its a flaw though. B. Surely studies based on observations still count.. I hope. C. Its both ethical and scientific.. not sure about C. D. I suppose in practice they would never determine a means to protect them..but is that a flaw? You're going to have to make you're choice on this one, probably best to talk to your teacher :)

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.