Question Description
Directions: Each passage below is accompanied by a number of questions. For some questions, you will consider how the passage might be revised to improve the expression of ideas. For other questions, you will consider how the passage might be edited to correct errors in sentence structure, usage, or punctuation. A passage or a question may be accompanied by one or more graphics (such as a table or graph) that you will consider as you make revising and editing decisions.Some questions will direct you to an underlined portion of a passage. Other questions will direct you to a location in a passage or ask you to think about the passage as a whole.After reading each passage, choose the answer to each question that most effectively improves the quality of writing in the passage or that makes the passage conform to the conventions of Standard Written English. Many questions include a "NO CHANGE" option. Choose that option if you think the best choice is to leave the relevant portion of the passage as it is.Question based on the following passage.Skepticism and the Scientific MethodEven scientists sometimes forget how essential skepticism, particularly self-skepticism, is to the scientific process. But scientific skepticism is driven by evidence, not agenda. Today, the field of climatology seems to have more than its share of skeptics, debating (1) a warming planet and the things that should be done by us about it, if anything.(2) They are coming from outside of the scientific community, many of these skeptics couch their arguments in political terms. Some claim that global warming is part of a partisan “left-wing” plot or a ploy by the scientific community to ensure funding for yet another “Chicken Little” scare. Others suggest that attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by changing energy or land use policies (3) would provide a needless cost of the American taxpayer of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Some even suggest that they are really part of an international conspiracy to undermine Americas competitiveness in the global marketplace.At the same time, others who legitimately question the data or theories related to climate change are too quickly labeled right-wing “deniers,” even if their concerns are not motivated by any partisan convictions.In fact, science has, or should have, nothing to do with ideology. Rather, it (4) is a process of identifying significant natural phenomena, gathering evidence about those phenomena, and (5) then we must find the most reliable explanation for that evidence. The preponderance of the evidence suggests that the earth is getting warmer, that the effects of that warming will be problematic, that there are things we can do to prevent or at least mitigate the worst outcomes, and (6) perhaps that many of these things are well worth doing. There is still plenty of uncertainty about the complex systems that make up our planetary climate, but we know enough to be concerned, (7) and to discuss the issue without politicizing it.The skeptics point out, rightly, that science isnt about consensus. The fact that 98% of climatologists regard something as true (8) isnt the same as it being true. After all, only centuries ago the majority of physicians worldwide believed that illnesses were caused not by germs or genetics, (9) but by demons or imbalances in “humors.”1. Having an honest and productive conversation about global warming (10) requires an educated public.2. When we, as public citizens, become more informed about the science of climatology, we become less susceptible to political sniping and to “consensus” as an argument.3. Most important, perhaps, we become better able to make good decisions about the future of our nation and our planet. (11)Q. (6)a)No changeb)also that many of these things perhaps may bec)many of these things perhaps may bed)that many of these things may beCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for SAT 2025 is part of SAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the SAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Each passage below is accompanied by a number of questions. For some questions, you will consider how the passage might be revised to improve the expression of ideas. For other questions, you will consider how the passage might be edited to correct errors in sentence structure, usage, or punctuation. A passage or a question may be accompanied by one or more graphics (such as a table or graph) that you will consider as you make revising and editing decisions.Some questions will direct you to an underlined portion of a passage. Other questions will direct you to a location in a passage or ask you to think about the passage as a whole.After reading each passage, choose the answer to each question that most effectively improves the quality of writing in the passage or that makes the passage conform to the conventions of Standard Written English. Many questions include a "NO CHANGE" option. Choose that option if you think the best choice is to leave the relevant portion of the passage as it is.Question based on the following passage.Skepticism and the Scientific MethodEven scientists sometimes forget how essential skepticism, particularly self-skepticism, is to the scientific process. But scientific skepticism is driven by evidence, not agenda. Today, the field of climatology seems to have more than its share of skeptics, debating (1) a warming planet and the things that should be done by us about it, if anything.(2) They are coming from outside of the scientific community, many of these skeptics couch their arguments in political terms. Some claim that global warming is part of a partisan “left-wing” plot or a ploy by the scientific community to ensure funding for yet another “Chicken Little” scare. Others suggest that attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by changing energy or land use policies (3) would provide a needless cost of the American taxpayer of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Some even suggest that they are really part of an international conspiracy to undermine Americas competitiveness in the global marketplace.At the same time, others who legitimately question the data or theories related to climate change are too quickly labeled right-wing “deniers,” even if their concerns are not motivated by any partisan convictions.In fact, science has, or should have, nothing to do with ideology. Rather, it (4) is a process of identifying significant natural phenomena, gathering evidence about those phenomena, and (5) then we must find the most reliable explanation for that evidence. The preponderance of the evidence suggests that the earth is getting warmer, that the effects of that warming will be problematic, that there are things we can do to prevent or at least mitigate the worst outcomes, and (6) perhaps that many of these things are well worth doing. There is still plenty of uncertainty about the complex systems that make up our planetary climate, but we know enough to be concerned, (7) and to discuss the issue without politicizing it.The skeptics point out, rightly, that science isnt about consensus. The fact that 98% of climatologists regard something as true (8) isnt the same as it being true. After all, only centuries ago the majority of physicians worldwide believed that illnesses were caused not by germs or genetics, (9) but by demons or imbalances in “humors.”1. Having an honest and productive conversation about global warming (10) requires an educated public.2. When we, as public citizens, become more informed about the science of climatology, we become less susceptible to political sniping and to “consensus” as an argument.3. Most important, perhaps, we become better able to make good decisions about the future of our nation and our planet. (11)Q. (6)a)No changeb)also that many of these things perhaps may bec)many of these things perhaps may bed)that many of these things may beCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for SAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Each passage below is accompanied by a number of questions. For some questions, you will consider how the passage might be revised to improve the expression of ideas. For other questions, you will consider how the passage might be edited to correct errors in sentence structure, usage, or punctuation. A passage or a question may be accompanied by one or more graphics (such as a table or graph) that you will consider as you make revising and editing decisions.Some questions will direct you to an underlined portion of a passage. Other questions will direct you to a location in a passage or ask you to think about the passage as a whole.After reading each passage, choose the answer to each question that most effectively improves the quality of writing in the passage or that makes the passage conform to the conventions of Standard Written English. Many questions include a "NO CHANGE" option. Choose that option if you think the best choice is to leave the relevant portion of the passage as it is.Question based on the following passage.Skepticism and the Scientific MethodEven scientists sometimes forget how essential skepticism, particularly self-skepticism, is to the scientific process. But scientific skepticism is driven by evidence, not agenda. Today, the field of climatology seems to have more than its share of skeptics, debating (1) a warming planet and the things that should be done by us about it, if anything.(2) They are coming from outside of the scientific community, many of these skeptics couch their arguments in political terms. Some claim that global warming is part of a partisan “left-wing” plot or a ploy by the scientific community to ensure funding for yet another “Chicken Little” scare. Others suggest that attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by changing energy or land use policies (3) would provide a needless cost of the American taxpayer of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Some even suggest that they are really part of an international conspiracy to undermine Americas competitiveness in the global marketplace.At the same time, others who legitimately question the data or theories related to climate change are too quickly labeled right-wing “deniers,” even if their concerns are not motivated by any partisan convictions.In fact, science has, or should have, nothing to do with ideology. Rather, it (4) is a process of identifying significant natural phenomena, gathering evidence about those phenomena, and (5) then we must find the most reliable explanation for that evidence. The preponderance of the evidence suggests that the earth is getting warmer, that the effects of that warming will be problematic, that there are things we can do to prevent or at least mitigate the worst outcomes, and (6) perhaps that many of these things are well worth doing. There is still plenty of uncertainty about the complex systems that make up our planetary climate, but we know enough to be concerned, (7) and to discuss the issue without politicizing it.The skeptics point out, rightly, that science isnt about consensus. The fact that 98% of climatologists regard something as true (8) isnt the same as it being true. After all, only centuries ago the majority of physicians worldwide believed that illnesses were caused not by germs or genetics, (9) but by demons or imbalances in “humors.”1. Having an honest and productive conversation about global warming (10) requires an educated public.2. When we, as public citizens, become more informed about the science of climatology, we become less susceptible to political sniping and to “consensus” as an argument.3. Most important, perhaps, we become better able to make good decisions about the future of our nation and our planet. (11)Q. (6)a)No changeb)also that many of these things perhaps may bec)many of these things perhaps may bed)that many of these things may beCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: Each passage below is accompanied by a number of questions. For some questions, you will consider how the passage might be revised to improve the expression of ideas. For other questions, you will consider how the passage might be edited to correct errors in sentence structure, usage, or punctuation. A passage or a question may be accompanied by one or more graphics (such as a table or graph) that you will consider as you make revising and editing decisions.Some questions will direct you to an underlined portion of a passage. Other questions will direct you to a location in a passage or ask you to think about the passage as a whole.After reading each passage, choose the answer to each question that most effectively improves the quality of writing in the passage or that makes the passage conform to the conventions of Standard Written English. Many questions include a "NO CHANGE" option. Choose that option if you think the best choice is to leave the relevant portion of the passage as it is.Question based on the following passage.Skepticism and the Scientific MethodEven scientists sometimes forget how essential skepticism, particularly self-skepticism, is to the scientific process. But scientific skepticism is driven by evidence, not agenda. Today, the field of climatology seems to have more than its share of skeptics, debating (1) a warming planet and the things that should be done by us about it, if anything.(2) They are coming from outside of the scientific community, many of these skeptics couch their arguments in political terms. Some claim that global warming is part of a partisan “left-wing” plot or a ploy by the scientific community to ensure funding for yet another “Chicken Little” scare. Others suggest that attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by changing energy or land use policies (3) would provide a needless cost of the American taxpayer of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Some even suggest that they are really part of an international conspiracy to undermine Americas competitiveness in the global marketplace.At the same time, others who legitimately question the data or theories related to climate change are too quickly labeled right-wing “deniers,” even if their concerns are not motivated by any partisan convictions.In fact, science has, or should have, nothing to do with ideology. Rather, it (4) is a process of identifying significant natural phenomena, gathering evidence about those phenomena, and (5) then we must find the most reliable explanation for that evidence. The preponderance of the evidence suggests that the earth is getting warmer, that the effects of that warming will be problematic, that there are things we can do to prevent or at least mitigate the worst outcomes, and (6) perhaps that many of these things are well worth doing. There is still plenty of uncertainty about the complex systems that make up our planetary climate, but we know enough to be concerned, (7) and to discuss the issue without politicizing it.The skeptics point out, rightly, that science isnt about consensus. The fact that 98% of climatologists regard something as true (8) isnt the same as it being true. After all, only centuries ago the majority of physicians worldwide believed that illnesses were caused not by germs or genetics, (9) but by demons or imbalances in “humors.”1. Having an honest and productive conversation about global warming (10) requires an educated public.2. When we, as public citizens, become more informed about the science of climatology, we become less susceptible to political sniping and to “consensus” as an argument.3. Most important, perhaps, we become better able to make good decisions about the future of our nation and our planet. (11)Q. (6)a)No changeb)also that many of these things perhaps may bec)many of these things perhaps may bed)that many of these things may beCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for SAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for SAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Each passage below is accompanied by a number of questions. For some questions, you will consider how the passage might be revised to improve the expression of ideas. For other questions, you will consider how the passage might be edited to correct errors in sentence structure, usage, or punctuation. A passage or a question may be accompanied by one or more graphics (such as a table or graph) that you will consider as you make revising and editing decisions.Some questions will direct you to an underlined portion of a passage. Other questions will direct you to a location in a passage or ask you to think about the passage as a whole.After reading each passage, choose the answer to each question that most effectively improves the quality of writing in the passage or that makes the passage conform to the conventions of Standard Written English. Many questions include a "NO CHANGE" option. Choose that option if you think the best choice is to leave the relevant portion of the passage as it is.Question based on the following passage.Skepticism and the Scientific MethodEven scientists sometimes forget how essential skepticism, particularly self-skepticism, is to the scientific process. But scientific skepticism is driven by evidence, not agenda. Today, the field of climatology seems to have more than its share of skeptics, debating (1) a warming planet and the things that should be done by us about it, if anything.(2) They are coming from outside of the scientific community, many of these skeptics couch their arguments in political terms. Some claim that global warming is part of a partisan “left-wing” plot or a ploy by the scientific community to ensure funding for yet another “Chicken Little” scare. Others suggest that attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by changing energy or land use policies (3) would provide a needless cost of the American taxpayer of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Some even suggest that they are really part of an international conspiracy to undermine Americas competitiveness in the global marketplace.At the same time, others who legitimately question the data or theories related to climate change are too quickly labeled right-wing “deniers,” even if their concerns are not motivated by any partisan convictions.In fact, science has, or should have, nothing to do with ideology. Rather, it (4) is a process of identifying significant natural phenomena, gathering evidence about those phenomena, and (5) then we must find the most reliable explanation for that evidence. The preponderance of the evidence suggests that the earth is getting warmer, that the effects of that warming will be problematic, that there are things we can do to prevent or at least mitigate the worst outcomes, and (6) perhaps that many of these things are well worth doing. There is still plenty of uncertainty about the complex systems that make up our planetary climate, but we know enough to be concerned, (7) and to discuss the issue without politicizing it.The skeptics point out, rightly, that science isnt about consensus. The fact that 98% of climatologists regard something as true (8) isnt the same as it being true. After all, only centuries ago the majority of physicians worldwide believed that illnesses were caused not by germs or genetics, (9) but by demons or imbalances in “humors.”1. Having an honest and productive conversation about global warming (10) requires an educated public.2. When we, as public citizens, become more informed about the science of climatology, we become less susceptible to political sniping and to “consensus” as an argument.3. Most important, perhaps, we become better able to make good decisions about the future of our nation and our planet. (11)Q. (6)a)No changeb)also that many of these things perhaps may bec)many of these things perhaps may bed)that many of these things may beCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Each passage below is accompanied by a number of questions. For some questions, you will consider how the passage might be revised to improve the expression of ideas. For other questions, you will consider how the passage might be edited to correct errors in sentence structure, usage, or punctuation. A passage or a question may be accompanied by one or more graphics (such as a table or graph) that you will consider as you make revising and editing decisions.Some questions will direct you to an underlined portion of a passage. Other questions will direct you to a location in a passage or ask you to think about the passage as a whole.After reading each passage, choose the answer to each question that most effectively improves the quality of writing in the passage or that makes the passage conform to the conventions of Standard Written English. Many questions include a "NO CHANGE" option. Choose that option if you think the best choice is to leave the relevant portion of the passage as it is.Question based on the following passage.Skepticism and the Scientific MethodEven scientists sometimes forget how essential skepticism, particularly self-skepticism, is to the scientific process. But scientific skepticism is driven by evidence, not agenda. Today, the field of climatology seems to have more than its share of skeptics, debating (1) a warming planet and the things that should be done by us about it, if anything.(2) They are coming from outside of the scientific community, many of these skeptics couch their arguments in political terms. Some claim that global warming is part of a partisan “left-wing” plot or a ploy by the scientific community to ensure funding for yet another “Chicken Little” scare. Others suggest that attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by changing energy or land use policies (3) would provide a needless cost of the American taxpayer of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Some even suggest that they are really part of an international conspiracy to undermine Americas competitiveness in the global marketplace.At the same time, others who legitimately question the data or theories related to climate change are too quickly labeled right-wing “deniers,” even if their concerns are not motivated by any partisan convictions.In fact, science has, or should have, nothing to do with ideology. Rather, it (4) is a process of identifying significant natural phenomena, gathering evidence about those phenomena, and (5) then we must find the most reliable explanation for that evidence. The preponderance of the evidence suggests that the earth is getting warmer, that the effects of that warming will be problematic, that there are things we can do to prevent or at least mitigate the worst outcomes, and (6) perhaps that many of these things are well worth doing. There is still plenty of uncertainty about the complex systems that make up our planetary climate, but we know enough to be concerned, (7) and to discuss the issue without politicizing it.The skeptics point out, rightly, that science isnt about consensus. The fact that 98% of climatologists regard something as true (8) isnt the same as it being true. After all, only centuries ago the majority of physicians worldwide believed that illnesses were caused not by germs or genetics, (9) but by demons or imbalances in “humors.”1. Having an honest and productive conversation about global warming (10) requires an educated public.2. When we, as public citizens, become more informed about the science of climatology, we become less susceptible to political sniping and to “consensus” as an argument.3. Most important, perhaps, we become better able to make good decisions about the future of our nation and our planet. (11)Q. (6)a)No changeb)also that many of these things perhaps may bec)many of these things perhaps may bed)that many of these things may beCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Each passage below is accompanied by a number of questions. For some questions, you will consider how the passage might be revised to improve the expression of ideas. For other questions, you will consider how the passage might be edited to correct errors in sentence structure, usage, or punctuation. A passage or a question may be accompanied by one or more graphics (such as a table or graph) that you will consider as you make revising and editing decisions.Some questions will direct you to an underlined portion of a passage. Other questions will direct you to a location in a passage or ask you to think about the passage as a whole.After reading each passage, choose the answer to each question that most effectively improves the quality of writing in the passage or that makes the passage conform to the conventions of Standard Written English. Many questions include a "NO CHANGE" option. Choose that option if you think the best choice is to leave the relevant portion of the passage as it is.Question based on the following passage.Skepticism and the Scientific MethodEven scientists sometimes forget how essential skepticism, particularly self-skepticism, is to the scientific process. But scientific skepticism is driven by evidence, not agenda. Today, the field of climatology seems to have more than its share of skeptics, debating (1) a warming planet and the things that should be done by us about it, if anything.(2) They are coming from outside of the scientific community, many of these skeptics couch their arguments in political terms. Some claim that global warming is part of a partisan “left-wing” plot or a ploy by the scientific community to ensure funding for yet another “Chicken Little” scare. Others suggest that attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by changing energy or land use policies (3) would provide a needless cost of the American taxpayer of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Some even suggest that they are really part of an international conspiracy to undermine Americas competitiveness in the global marketplace.At the same time, others who legitimately question the data or theories related to climate change are too quickly labeled right-wing “deniers,” even if their concerns are not motivated by any partisan convictions.In fact, science has, or should have, nothing to do with ideology. Rather, it (4) is a process of identifying significant natural phenomena, gathering evidence about those phenomena, and (5) then we must find the most reliable explanation for that evidence. The preponderance of the evidence suggests that the earth is getting warmer, that the effects of that warming will be problematic, that there are things we can do to prevent or at least mitigate the worst outcomes, and (6) perhaps that many of these things are well worth doing. There is still plenty of uncertainty about the complex systems that make up our planetary climate, but we know enough to be concerned, (7) and to discuss the issue without politicizing it.The skeptics point out, rightly, that science isnt about consensus. The fact that 98% of climatologists regard something as true (8) isnt the same as it being true. After all, only centuries ago the majority of physicians worldwide believed that illnesses were caused not by germs or genetics, (9) but by demons or imbalances in “humors.”1. Having an honest and productive conversation about global warming (10) requires an educated public.2. When we, as public citizens, become more informed about the science of climatology, we become less susceptible to political sniping and to “consensus” as an argument.3. Most important, perhaps, we become better able to make good decisions about the future of our nation and our planet. (11)Q. (6)a)No changeb)also that many of these things perhaps may bec)many of these things perhaps may bed)that many of these things may beCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Each passage below is accompanied by a number of questions. For some questions, you will consider how the passage might be revised to improve the expression of ideas. For other questions, you will consider how the passage might be edited to correct errors in sentence structure, usage, or punctuation. A passage or a question may be accompanied by one or more graphics (such as a table or graph) that you will consider as you make revising and editing decisions.Some questions will direct you to an underlined portion of a passage. Other questions will direct you to a location in a passage or ask you to think about the passage as a whole.After reading each passage, choose the answer to each question that most effectively improves the quality of writing in the passage or that makes the passage conform to the conventions of Standard Written English. Many questions include a "NO CHANGE" option. Choose that option if you think the best choice is to leave the relevant portion of the passage as it is.Question based on the following passage.Skepticism and the Scientific MethodEven scientists sometimes forget how essential skepticism, particularly self-skepticism, is to the scientific process. But scientific skepticism is driven by evidence, not agenda. Today, the field of climatology seems to have more than its share of skeptics, debating (1) a warming planet and the things that should be done by us about it, if anything.(2) They are coming from outside of the scientific community, many of these skeptics couch their arguments in political terms. Some claim that global warming is part of a partisan “left-wing” plot or a ploy by the scientific community to ensure funding for yet another “Chicken Little” scare. Others suggest that attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by changing energy or land use policies (3) would provide a needless cost of the American taxpayer of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Some even suggest that they are really part of an international conspiracy to undermine Americas competitiveness in the global marketplace.At the same time, others who legitimately question the data or theories related to climate change are too quickly labeled right-wing “deniers,” even if their concerns are not motivated by any partisan convictions.In fact, science has, or should have, nothing to do with ideology. Rather, it (4) is a process of identifying significant natural phenomena, gathering evidence about those phenomena, and (5) then we must find the most reliable explanation for that evidence. The preponderance of the evidence suggests that the earth is getting warmer, that the effects of that warming will be problematic, that there are things we can do to prevent or at least mitigate the worst outcomes, and (6) perhaps that many of these things are well worth doing. There is still plenty of uncertainty about the complex systems that make up our planetary climate, but we know enough to be concerned, (7) and to discuss the issue without politicizing it.The skeptics point out, rightly, that science isnt about consensus. The fact that 98% of climatologists regard something as true (8) isnt the same as it being true. After all, only centuries ago the majority of physicians worldwide believed that illnesses were caused not by germs or genetics, (9) but by demons or imbalances in “humors.”1. Having an honest and productive conversation about global warming (10) requires an educated public.2. When we, as public citizens, become more informed about the science of climatology, we become less susceptible to political sniping and to “consensus” as an argument.3. Most important, perhaps, we become better able to make good decisions about the future of our nation and our planet. (11)Q. (6)a)No changeb)also that many of these things perhaps may bec)many of these things perhaps may bed)that many of these things may beCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Each passage below is accompanied by a number of questions. For some questions, you will consider how the passage might be revised to improve the expression of ideas. For other questions, you will consider how the passage might be edited to correct errors in sentence structure, usage, or punctuation. A passage or a question may be accompanied by one or more graphics (such as a table or graph) that you will consider as you make revising and editing decisions.Some questions will direct you to an underlined portion of a passage. Other questions will direct you to a location in a passage or ask you to think about the passage as a whole.After reading each passage, choose the answer to each question that most effectively improves the quality of writing in the passage or that makes the passage conform to the conventions of Standard Written English. Many questions include a "NO CHANGE" option. Choose that option if you think the best choice is to leave the relevant portion of the passage as it is.Question based on the following passage.Skepticism and the Scientific MethodEven scientists sometimes forget how essential skepticism, particularly self-skepticism, is to the scientific process. But scientific skepticism is driven by evidence, not agenda. Today, the field of climatology seems to have more than its share of skeptics, debating (1) a warming planet and the things that should be done by us about it, if anything.(2) They are coming from outside of the scientific community, many of these skeptics couch their arguments in political terms. Some claim that global warming is part of a partisan “left-wing” plot or a ploy by the scientific community to ensure funding for yet another “Chicken Little” scare. Others suggest that attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by changing energy or land use policies (3) would provide a needless cost of the American taxpayer of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Some even suggest that they are really part of an international conspiracy to undermine Americas competitiveness in the global marketplace.At the same time, others who legitimately question the data or theories related to climate change are too quickly labeled right-wing “deniers,” even if their concerns are not motivated by any partisan convictions.In fact, science has, or should have, nothing to do with ideology. Rather, it (4) is a process of identifying significant natural phenomena, gathering evidence about those phenomena, and (5) then we must find the most reliable explanation for that evidence. The preponderance of the evidence suggests that the earth is getting warmer, that the effects of that warming will be problematic, that there are things we can do to prevent or at least mitigate the worst outcomes, and (6) perhaps that many of these things are well worth doing. There is still plenty of uncertainty about the complex systems that make up our planetary climate, but we know enough to be concerned, (7) and to discuss the issue without politicizing it.The skeptics point out, rightly, that science isnt about consensus. The fact that 98% of climatologists regard something as true (8) isnt the same as it being true. After all, only centuries ago the majority of physicians worldwide believed that illnesses were caused not by germs or genetics, (9) but by demons or imbalances in “humors.”1. Having an honest and productive conversation about global warming (10) requires an educated public.2. When we, as public citizens, become more informed about the science of climatology, we become less susceptible to political sniping and to “consensus” as an argument.3. Most important, perhaps, we become better able to make good decisions about the future of our nation and our planet. (11)Q. (6)a)No changeb)also that many of these things perhaps may bec)many of these things perhaps may bed)that many of these things may beCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice SAT tests.