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.
A, obviously. Showing that the artifact is chiseled into a figure demonstrates massive stone-carving skills on the Egyptian's part.
What action might you take to convince others that this is an unreliable source about ancient Greece? Date Published: June 15, 2012 Author: Joseph H. Ancient Greece produced the most successful civilization the world has ever seen. I think its capital city had the largest population of any city in all of world history. Its military probably never lost a single battle, and I bet it conquered nearly all of Europe, Asia, and Africa. I've heard a report that said one in every three books found in American libraries today was first written by the ancient Greeks! A. Note that the author has not included his last name along with the article B. Explain that articles written in modern times cannot accurately describe ancient history C. Criticize the author for relying too heavily on secondary sources D. Point out that the author has not provided citations for any of his claims
A is completely wrong it almost makes me laugh XD B is wrong aswell due to historical documentation of the past. C is somewhat correct in a sense but is very general in it's claim. D is the most correct answer since the author provided no textual evidence.
lol ok thnks
Np. Just ask if you have anymore :p
A voter would like to use evidence to determine whether an advertisement promoting a presidential candidate is credible. Which of the following actions would best help her achieve this goal? A. Determine whether the ad was a primary source or secondary source B. Look at the candidate's official website to learn more about him or her C. Read blog posts created by her friends and family members D. Search for several different journal articles about the candidate
@Khirro is this one d
A is stupidly wrong, wow. B is wrong aswell, since the political figures site could easily be biased. C is biased aswell due to the fact that they are receiving the information from the political figure's family and friends. D is correct because it provides multiple perspectives.
hey do you believe in jesus christ? @Khirro
So, I like explaining why the answers are correct. Plus, it's against the Code of Conduct of OpenStudy if you simply give the answer without an explanation.
And no, I'm atheist.
ohh ok i understand thanks for the answer and the explication,,and ohh ok,, just to let you know my God's not dead! :)
Religion is religion, however it is. I'm glad that you can accept mine and I to accept yours :3
Imagine you are reading an article about the goals of the National Archives to reduce its energy use. What two facts could help you know that this source is reliable and credible? A. The information's relevance to politics B. The information's status as primary or secondary C. The information's creator and date of publication D. The information's topic and tone
well you have to understand that Jesus christ lives, and he created the whole earth and the universe :)
and he's coming soon
B is the correct choice. For example, if it were a primary source, it would be produced by the National Archives themselves, explaining their own reasoning and goals. A secondary source would be an article on the topic and the National Archives.
thanks and hear please read:) If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by confessing with your mouth that you are saved. 11As the Scriptures tell us, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be disgraced.”e 12Jew and Gentilef are the same in this respect. They have the same Lord, who gives generously to all who call on him. 13For “Everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved.”g 14But how can they call on him to save them unless they believe in him? And how can they believe in him if they have never heard about him? And how can they hear about him unless someone tells them? 15And how will anyone go and tell them without being sent? That is why the Scriptures say, “How beautiful are the feet of messengers who bring good news!”h
Thanks for caring about my fate after death, but no thanks :)
Jesus loves you remember that, he wants to save you. not me but he.
Examine the two paintings below depicting famous events from American history. The first image, painted in 1940, shows the signing of the U.S. Constitution in 1787. The second, painted in 1836, shows the American victory at the Battle of Yorktown in 1781. Which of these paintings should be considered a primary source?
Both paintings are primary sources. B. Only The Scene at the Signing of the Constitution is a primary source. C. Only Siege of Yorktown is a primary source. D. Neither painting is a primary source.
A, both are primary sources.
A secondary source is reliable and credible if the person who created the source is an expert on the topic, is educated and respected in the field of study, and: A. is published on the Internet. B. does not have anything negative to say about the topic. C. is not influenced by a bias. D. was living at the time of the subject matter.
A is untrue. So is B, aswell as C since they both coincide. That leaves D to be the correct answer.
Which of the following describes an advantage primary sources have over secondary sources for a historian? A. They can summarize a huge amount of data that a historian could not sort through alone. B. They can reveal how individuals experiencing historical events actually reacted. C. They can help a historian focus on important themes rather than on a specific piece of evidence. D. They can compare and contrast conclusions other historians have made about a time period.
B is the correct due to the fact that primary sources allow you a first person perspective upon the topic.
To be considered a primary source, a source must be: A. written or created by an educated expert. B. written or created by a person who experienced an event. C. written or created for use as historical evidence. D. written or created by an objective, unbiased person.
B, the person must experience the event. Example, Anne Frank's diary and her involvement within WWII, making her diary a primary source.
If you were to read an excerpt from a journal written by a woman during the time of the American Civil War, which of the following would you consider to help determine if the source has any bias? A. The writer's financial situation: Was she paid for her writing? B. The writer's means of publication: Was she self-published? C. The writer's education: Did she have expertise in writing or history? D. The writer's point of view: Which side did she support in the war?
last one thnks, God bless
hey do you be online in the mornings???
D is the correct answer since it is the only option that glints at bias.
And yeah. You can become my Fan if you want to know when I'm on or not :p I'm on every morning through the week days.
oh ok hey i got a 60% :( can u help me again
A secondary source is most likely reliable and credible if it is: A. created by an educated expert and published in an academic journal. B. a firsthand account published in a magazine. C. written by a student and posted to his individual website. D. creatively written and published on a blog.
Can you post in a new strand? This one is a bit crowded.