Study questions platform-wide or filter by specific tests with correct answers revealed.
This three-blank question rewards careful reading of each clause.
Blank (i): The sentence argues that even someone not paying close attention would notice the historical difference in fish abundance. This is a rhetorical device lowering the bar — even the most casual (inattentive, uninterested) observer would see it. Using “prescient” (having foresight) or “clearheaded” would raise the bar rather than lower it, weakening the rhetorical effect.
Blank (ii): The passage envisions the past ocean as healthy and full. So those formerly abundant marine mammal species would appear plentiful (abundant, numerous). “Threatened” implies danger, contradicting the image of a healthy past ocean, and “unfamiliar” does not fit the logic.
Blank (iii): Without the magic glasses, we cannot easily perceive or recognize the difference between past and present oceans. Discern means to perceive or recognize clearly — perfect. “Ignore” and “dismiss” imply active rejection, not the passive difficulty of perception described.
Correct Answers: Blank (i) = A (casual), Blank (ii) = E (plentiful), Blank (iii) = H (discern).
\(\dfrac{109}{6} \div \dfrac{7}{3} = \dfrac{109}{6} \times \dfrac{3}{7} = \dfrac{327}{42} = \dfrac{109}{14} = 7\tfrac{11}{14}\)
The percent decrease in average daily circulation from 1960 to 1970 was approximately:
[Note: From the graph, circulation in 1960 was 650,000 and in 1970 was 440,000]
Percent decrease $= \frac{\text{decrease}}{\text{original}} \times 100\%$
Decrease $= 650{,}000 - 440{,}000 = 210{,}000$
Percent decrease $= \frac{210{,}000}{650{,}000} \times 100\% = \frac{210}{650} \times 100\% = \frac{21}{65} \times 100\%$
$= 0.3231 \times 100\% \approx 32.31\%$
Therefore, the percent decrease is approximately $32\%$.
The textbook discusses the Scientific Revolution in the context of how print media accelerated scientific discovery by allowing findings to spread rapidly across Europe. Key scientists mentioned include:
- Andreas Vesalius (1514โ1564): Published De Humani Corporis Fabrica (1543), which discredited Galen's anatomical views and assembled the first accurate human skeleton from cadaver dissections. The textbook also states that Vesalius “found that the circulation of blood resolved from pumping of the heart” โ though this is more fully attributed to Harvey
- William Harvey (1578โ1657): The textbook explicitly states Harvey “demonstrated that blood circulates via dissections and various other experimental techniques” โ making Harvey the correct answer for demonstrating blood circulation specifically
The printing press enabled Harvey's findings, published in Exercitatio Anatomica de Motu Cordis et Sanguinis in Animalibus (1628), to reach the international scientific community, contributing to the rapid accumulation of medical knowledge in the 17th century.
Sign in to join the conversation and share your thoughts.
Log In to Comment