Joe Redington Sr invented modern long-distance dog Racing, turned into the Alaska State deport.
He bring back to prominece the sport by organizing the long-distance race, looking to save the sled dog culture and Alaska Huskies, wich were being extint in the región, he used to say ¨Dogs will always keep you warm and take you there¨, ¨If he didn´t see a dog in home entrances, he didn´t had a Good feeling¨ also he did want to preserve the historical Iditarod Trail between Seward and Nome.
Since the 70´s the competition has grown even with financial issues, but it became a very well renowed sport that later the competitors where sponsored as any other sport.
C
The Declaration of Independence states that each person has rights that cannot be violated, and it is the govt’s job to protect these rights (rights such as freedom of speech, ability to gather, etc)
Answer:
B. Populous
Explanation:
The best option that completes this sentence is the word 'populous'.
<em>Did you know Hong Kong is one of the world's most </em><u><em>populous</em></u><em> cities?</em>
To complete this sentence we needed a word that modifies the noun 'cities', so we needed an adjective.
Option A is wrong because it is misspelled.
Option C is wrong because it is a noun. To put two nouns together doesn't make any sense to the information of the sentence.
Option B is correct.
<u>Populous (adjective)</u> - full of residents or inhabitants, as a region; heavily populated. This word is completely suitable for our sentence as it finishes its complete thought.
I hope it helped you :)
<span>A. It gives an example of how modern and Elizabethan perspectives differ.
By using specific details that any modern reader would be able to visualize, even if they don't have experience with those types of things, the reader would get a better understanding of how their lives differ from those in Elizabethan England. </span>
"If you are like me, such a law would be a catastrophe and would only mean one thing: the end of life as we know it"
Illogical conclusions shows a cause-and-effect relationship that does not exist, based on something that doesn't make sense. To find an illogical conclusion, you can ask how the initial information is linked to the final conclusion. Is there any information that supports it?
