Which of these conclusions is most likely correct about the locations? Both the locations have dense forests. Both the locations are submerged under water. Location 1 is a forest at present and Location 2 was a forest in the past. Location 2 is a forest at present and Location 1 was a forest in the past
@nickirivera can u help me?
@harpreetsk can u help me??
@genius12 can u help me genius?
@germanphysics can u help me??
@thomaster can u help me???
I think this question fits better in the geology or biology section.
ohh. okay thanks!
but what do you think is the best answer?
oh I said the last one but I am not sure
You can see that location 2 is submerged under water because of the fish and shellfish fossils. location 1 used to be under water because the shells and fish fossils are under the leaves. In location 2, the leaves are under the fish etc which indicates that it was a forest once. Now what do you think is the correct answer?
I think its B
thats my opinion
No, location 1 is not submerged under water
the leaves are on top which indicates that it used to be under water, now it's probably a forest
so it is A?
If you read my explanation, you should get the correct answer. I almost gave it away.
C then
so it is C
do you think it's C? or are you just guessing
but can't the leaves be in the water too
I still think it's B
I am not guessing I said B because do you find shells in forests?? of course not lol
I don't think that's the purpose of the question. They want you to come with an explanation why the leaves are on top in location 1 and on the bottom in location 2. It means that location 1 is a forest and location 2 is submerged under water and used to be a forest in the past.
You can find shells in the forest if it used to be under water in the past.
True I understand
So what's your final answer?
Its C duh lol
C
Very good :)
Thanks for the help!
Yayy thank you!!! :) youre so nice
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!