0
What else can I help you with?
What are scientists discovering about animals being smart?
The more scientists study animal behavior, the more they learn that animals were smarter than they thought. Now we know that even animals like octopus and alligators can use tools. Apes can learn sign language. Dolphins have names for themselves. That's just the beginning.
Why scientists developed a system for animal calssification?
Scientists wanted to organize the animals in a mannered way. also, they wanted to understand more about animals.
What benefit was provided to Americans by making more foods available for animals?
all the answer are correct
How many animals have scientists name?
More than 3 million species
Why do scientists use a variety of methods when investigating science?
to find out more about it
Did Scientists began more intensive study of real plants and animals during the Renaissance?
true
Is more quicker fall correct English?
No, it is incorrect. The correct terms are just 'quicker' or 'more quickly'.
Is it correct to make birds and animals pet?
Domestication of animals is partly what allowed civilisations to emerge. It was inevitable that some of those animals would become more closely associated with people. So it is certainly correct that animals become pets. It is a consequence of having the society which we have.
Animals often leave an area hours or even days before an earthquake strikes Many scientists suppose this is because animals are more sensitive to than humans?
ultrasound
Is it impossible to study plants and animals that are still alive?
It is not impossible to study plants and animals that are still alive. Scientists frequently observe plants and animals and even run tests and experiments on them in order to learn more about them.
How is data valuable to scientists?
Hi, Data is valuable to scientists because it helps tell them if there hypothesis was correct or wrong. It also tells them more about the subject they are studying. :p :0 :) Your welcome ()~() ( '~') l l
What inferences can you draw from the fact that animals are safer in areas where scientists are carring out their work inference about animals?
Answer: They are raised in a Lab Answer: You cannot conclude that because animals are safer where scientists are that they are ONLY lab animals; it is very possible (and extremely likely in this scenario) that they are wild animals. If the animals are in a lab then safety is moot; their is no need for drawing an inference, there is no danger to the animals. How does this follow? The question has 4 postulates: 1) There is danger to the animals: scientists reduce the danger. You cannot reduce something that doesn't already exist, therefore initial danger has to be > 0. 2) The initial danger is NOT from the scientists: see #1, the scientists augment the existing danger, they are not the originators. 3) In a closed environment there is no external danger to the animals: a controlled environment defies uncontrolled danger; all is controlled. 4) The scientists are not working in a closed environment (lab) - see #2, #3 the scientists are the only source of danger in the lab environment; since by definition there is initial danger besides the scientists there must something not being controlled, BUT a lab is a controlled environment. 5) Inferences are based on incomplete data, generally about environments that are not controllable. QED they are speaking of animals in the wild. You can say it's possible: 1) Animals are safer because they are being watched closely; poachers are less likely to interfere. 2) A change in the environment (the scientists there) can disrupt the predators and more animals are protected from attack by predator. (a numbers game - are 10 antelopes worth bothering one lion?) 3) Diseased animals are more likely to be cured or destroyed (ending the passing of disease) by scientists thereby increasing health of the rest of the herd.
