Answer:
A mass causality refers to an event or incident that occurs and overwhelmes the medical resources available at a moment.
such as;
[tex]{ \sf{ - \: terrorist \: action}} \\ { \sf{ - \: shooting \: massacre}}[/tex]
If enough experimental data supports a hypothesis, then it:
O A. Is proven 100% true.
O
B. Is falsified.
OC. Is accepted as true until prolan false.
OD. Becomes an Observational Law
Answer: C) Is accepted as true until proven false
==========================================================
Explanation:
We cannot prove the hypothesis to be 100% true because there might be data out there that we haven't accounted for, or some scenario that we haven't thought of yet. There's always going to be room for uncertainty and doubt. Keep in mind that such doubt does not necessarily mean that the theory is automatically false.
So all of this rules out choice A.
Choice B is ruled out as well because data supporting a hypothesis doesn't falsify the hypothesis. The term "falsify" means "to prove false" as you'd expect.
Choice C is the answer because the data seems to support the hypothesis and again we leave room for error. It's quite possible that in some unspecified date in the future, there are better methods of measurement to get a better sense of what's going on.
Choice D is ruled out because a law refers to something like the law of gravity. It's something you observe but it doesn't explain why something works. It doesn't provide the underlying mechanics of what's going on. We simply just report what we see which is exactly what an observation is.
Which of the following would be considered anthropogenic impacts on the natural environment?
a. air pollution
b. introduction of invasive species
c. burning of fossil fuels
d. all of the above
Answer:
D. All of the above.
