by praising the efficiency of modern-day Internet research doesn't relate to anything regarding "Choreographers of Matter, Life, and Intelligence" when it comes to argumentation. Comparing scientific knowledge to grains of sand on a beach is poetic, but it is no argument either. Proving names of modern scientists and their contributions also shows nothing but the scientists and their contributions themselves. It doesn't work as proof for <em>"an impending scientific revolution".</em>
What Michio Kaku does, as the good scientist that he is, is to show evidence. And he does so "by providing quantitative proof of recent scientific progress"
<span>British government leaders didn't present the Zimmermann telegram to Wilson for a few weeks. Hall reminded them that outrage was growing in America over Germany's announcement late in the day of January 31 that the German navy would resume unrestricted submarine warfare. In fact, that policy provoked the U.S. government to cut diplomatic relations with Germany in February.</span>
Question: <em>As Kamau walks down the road in "The Return", why does he look straight ahead?</em>
<em />
Answer:
He looks straight ahead as he sees a group of women drawing water from the Honia river.
The sentences that are punctuated correctly are listed below.
- My science teacher, who is new to my school, is encouraging me to enter the science fair.
- The roses that I planted in my garden have not yet bloomed.
The other sentences should be written differently.
My friend Ray, a figure skater, would like to learn to play chess.
- We need the commas to separate the additional, irrelevant information.
Javier made a sculpture out of seashells that he found on the beach.
- The comma is not necessary.
The winning dog, which is a collie, completed the course in only twelve seconds.
- We need the commas to separate the additional, irrelevant information.