By simply boiling the water, and checking if there is any salt residue.
Without the atmosphere, Earth's surface would be exposed to the full force of the sun's radiation and we would not have oxygen to breathe. Temperatures would fluctuate drastically between day and night and protection from meteoroids would be limited. Life as we know it would not be able to exist without the atmosphere.
The mysterious flashes in the sky without thunder could be caused by heat lightning, which occurs when lightning is too far away to be heard.
Contour lines connect points of equal height, and show grades of hills, the closer together the lines the steeper the grade. The map legend should tell you the difference in elevation between lines, this could be in feet or meters
This is what most people would say if they read this question: The difference is that they are both the same so there is no difference because the bad weather and bad weather are both the same things anyways. but that is totally wrong because a bad weather and bad weather are not the same a bad weather is one but bad weather can be more than one . And also a bad weather has a in front of it and bad weather doesn't So from my discrimination it could be 60% right. Call em hot and sexy babes .my name is Annalisa
You will have to expand a bit. A tree could live producing fruit without the need for any organism consuming that fruit. The fruit will just fall when mature. A company producing tables will need to sell to a consumer so he/her can pay for the cost of producing the tables and to produce more in the future. A non for profit organisation could produce brochures that explain how to prevent getting aids. The consumers are the community but they are not paying for it. Probably the government, a church, unicef, etc would fund the non for profit because it benefits the community. Also, in economics there is a difference between a consumer and a buyer. Toys are consumed by children, but they are bought by the parents.
You could measure its resistance; the saltier it is then the better conductor it is.
One way to test sour substances without tasting them is to use litmus paper, which changes color in the presence of acids. To test bitter substances, you can use a taste receptor cell assay, which involves testing how the substance triggers specific receptors that respond to bitterness. Both methods are non-tasting ways to assess sour and bitter attributes.
Would=if he wanted to Could=if he was able to
no wish i could
How are we supposed to answer this without knowing what the make and model of the pistol is? You could be talking about a Jennings, or you could be talking about a Walther - there's a significant difference in value between the two.
An odds ratio is the difference between the number of times that something happens and does not happen. An unadjusted odds ratio is a guess between what could or could not happen.
the difference is obvious, You should be a bride or you are to be a bride. (should=could (sorta) and to be = you will be.
and what?
The difference between which and what in English questions is that which is used when you are asking someone to make a choice. For example, which color would you like, pink or blue? You could also use what in that sentence. What would be used in a questions without a choice, for example what time are we leaving?
"could" asumes it may have, "would" asumes it was.
Some animals that could have a bitter tasting flesh are some fish and some exotic animals like snails and squid.
managed to refers to a particular situation