After months of grueling research, karl has come to the conclusion that brand a cola tastes better than brand b cola. why would people claim that this is not a valid conclusion?

The correct answer is "Scientific conclusions need to be based on fact and not opinion".

Explanation:

The missing options of this question are:

A)Scientific conclusions need to be based on fact and not opinion.

B)His friends are wrong, and this is a valid conclusion.

C)Karl did not follow the scientific method.

D)Karl is not a real scientist.

The correct answer is option A) "Scientific conclusions need to be based on fact and not opinion".

One of the most important characteristics that a scientist needs to include in her or his reports, is to make the conclusions based entirely on facts. In this case, declaring that a Brand of cola tastes better than other is not a fact, because taste is a perception that depends upon people's opinion. A proper scientific conclusion would be for instance declaring that according to the people's opinion evaluated on the research, most of them believe that Brand A cola tastes better than Brand B cola.

the fact that your name is twinkie makes me not wanna you at so im not

just go with your heart buddy