Why would an interpretation of a historical event change over time? check all that apply.

new evidence is discovered.
new opinions are considered.
oversights and errors are corrected.
new technology is applied to evidence.
pieces of evidence are lost or stolen.

New evidence is discovered & Oversights and errors are corrected

Thats what i personally think because new opinions have to be backed with evidence, while if a piece of evidence is lost or stolen, it doesn't change the arguments because even though it is lost or stolen, there ought to be copies of the original object, but im not sure about new technology being applied to evidence, but it can go either or, its a 50/50 because new technology can enhance historical discoveries, or find new ones, but applying new technology as evidence has to be backed up with facts as to why it should be applied

i discarded the supernatant and kept the pellet in this part of the experiment because you have to return all unused chemicals into their original containers at the end of each labratory.

explanation:

what precedent do you see the ordinance of 1787 setting for the 1st amendment of the us constitution : )

this person under me, copied me. owo