An environmental organization releases a study reporting that the cities with the worst traffic jams have the worst air pollution.

which statement describes the best conclusion to draw from the study?

a. there may be a link between traffic jams and a city's air quality.

b. cities with good air quality do not have traffic jams.

c. avoiding traffic jams can improve air quality.

d. being stuck in traffic causes air pollution.

B

Step-by-step explanation:

The study doesn't prove a causation, only a correlation.  So we can conclude that cities with good air quality do not have traffic jams.

Step-by-step explanation:

If an environmental organization releases a report where they state that the cities with the worst traffic jams have the worst air pollution, then we can deduct from this conclusion its anti-thesis, which is the cities without traffic jams have better air quality.

We deduct this because the given statement is a relation between two variables: traffic jam and air pollution. When we set a relationship between variable and we draw a conclusion, we have to determine all the deduction that can be made, like in this case.

Basically, the given relationship between variables is directly proportional, the more traffic jams, the more air pollution. Which also can be stated as the less traffic jams, the less air pollution.

Therefore, the conclusion that describes best the conclusion draw from the study is B. Cities with good air quality do not have traffic jams.

answer: the answer is 35%

answer: the answer is (b) amie should have multiplied

step-by-step explanation: given a sphere and a cylinder with same radius and height.

let, 'r' be the radius of the cylinder and sphere and 'h' be the height of the cylinder. according to the question,

r = h.

now, the volume of the sphere will be

and the volume of the cylinder will be

therefore, we have

thus, ammie should have multiplied the volume of the sphere