C.E quiz 2.1
Short Answer:
1. George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and the Statue of Liberty
2. Women's Health Institute and the Musculoskeletal Institute
3. She is suing Evereve Inc. because she thinks they stole her logo and because they were reneging on a previous agreement to keep the problem away from a trial.
4. Nick Medina
5. I am personally not a fan of scary movies so I wouldn't see any of them, but if I had to choose one, I would watch Happy Death Day.
Long Response:
1. The writer believes that science should be used in many more political decisions and it is currently being neglected when it could be used. The writer advises that we get the word out about how science can be beneficial, and that political leaders use it more frequently in decisions. Especially for the environment, the writer thinks it's important to use scientific research and background to make decisions.
2. In paragraph two, the writer directly talks about their point and how science is being currently neglected when it should be used. The textual evidence is apparent in paragraph two more so than in other paragraphs that the author has a direct statement about the matter
3. The writer says, "It is dangerous to develop policies related to energy, health, or clean water if such policies are not based on the best scientific information.
4. The author offers many facts to prove what they were talking about. The writer mentions how scientific research has benefited cancer treatments, guiding a spacecraft to Pluto, finding out how our relative Lucy came to its demise many years ago, and then continues to explain how more scientific research in the future can lead to more advancements in society.
5. The writer spoke directly to readers when they talked about the direness of our situation without having science implemented and coming into play with major decisions. He advised to readers that everyone should be informed about science before jumping to conclusions that they might not know entirely about. He ended strongly and defended what he had been arguing about in the last few lines of the story, summing it all up for readers.
6. I think that he defended his opinions extremely well, and did it in a respectful way. He was not too forceful in his opinions, but he allowed the readers to think for themselves as well. He really brought a new insight to how decisions should be made and how we can help people be informed about science.
7. I do agree with his opinion, and he also helped me understand the matter more while I read the article. Making uninformed decisions can be hazardous to people and our earth and is overall, not what we are capable of. I think if scientists have research about a matter, it should be used in decisions because if not, there's not a purpose for research.
1. George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and the Statue of Liberty
2. Women's Health Institute and the Musculoskeletal Institute
3. She is suing Evereve Inc. because she thinks they stole her logo and because they were reneging on a previous agreement to keep the problem away from a trial.
4. Nick Medina
5. I am personally not a fan of scary movies so I wouldn't see any of them, but if I had to choose one, I would watch Happy Death Day.
Long Response:
1. The writer believes that science should be used in many more political decisions and it is currently being neglected when it could be used. The writer advises that we get the word out about how science can be beneficial, and that political leaders use it more frequently in decisions. Especially for the environment, the writer thinks it's important to use scientific research and background to make decisions.
2. In paragraph two, the writer directly talks about their point and how science is being currently neglected when it should be used. The textual evidence is apparent in paragraph two more so than in other paragraphs that the author has a direct statement about the matter
3. The writer says, "It is dangerous to develop policies related to energy, health, or clean water if such policies are not based on the best scientific information.
4. The author offers many facts to prove what they were talking about. The writer mentions how scientific research has benefited cancer treatments, guiding a spacecraft to Pluto, finding out how our relative Lucy came to its demise many years ago, and then continues to explain how more scientific research in the future can lead to more advancements in society.
5. The writer spoke directly to readers when they talked about the direness of our situation without having science implemented and coming into play with major decisions. He advised to readers that everyone should be informed about science before jumping to conclusions that they might not know entirely about. He ended strongly and defended what he had been arguing about in the last few lines of the story, summing it all up for readers.
6. I think that he defended his opinions extremely well, and did it in a respectful way. He was not too forceful in his opinions, but he allowed the readers to think for themselves as well. He really brought a new insight to how decisions should be made and how we can help people be informed about science.
7. I do agree with his opinion, and he also helped me understand the matter more while I read the article. Making uninformed decisions can be hazardous to people and our earth and is overall, not what we are capable of. I think if scientists have research about a matter, it should be used in decisions because if not, there's not a purpose for research.
Comments
Post a Comment