1. Santorini a. The Mississippi River Freezes in New Orleans 2. Mt. Vesuvius b. ___9__ The Year Without a Summer
3.Ilopango c. 11_ Worst Disaster of the 20th Century
4. Mt. Merapi d. __13___ One of the Seven Natural Wonders of the World
5. Mt. Etna e. _10 The Loudest Sound Ever Recorded
6. Laki f. ___7__ The Most Voluminous Stratovolcano of the Cascades
7. Mt. Shasta g. Ten Times the Eruption of Mt. St. Helens
8. Mt. Redoubt h. An Avalanche that Sped at 110-240 km/hr for 24 km
9. Tambora i. ___2__ Buried Pompeii
10. Krakatau j. The Mountain of Fire
11. Mt. Pelee k. ___15__ One of the Most Active Volcanoes on Earth
12. Santamaria l. __14___ Volcanic Ash 4000 km Away in San Francisco
13. Paricutin m. _1 The Legend of Atlantis
14. Mt. St. Helens n. __8___ Nearly Brought Down a 747
15. Kilauea o. Cyclops Fashioned Lightning Bolts for Zeus
16. Mt. Pinatubo p. ___3__ Redirected the Mayan Empire

chemistry sucks a**

explanation:

1. the question asks the most appropriate, which seems to rule out "all of the above." your choice appears to be the correct one.

2. the protocol described is good for identifying correlation, but not cause and effect. for cause/effect, you need to devise a protocol that will assign the treatment (or not) to groups that have essentially the same "demographics" with respect to all the other variables. your choice regarding control group seems appropriate. random assignment of treatment (choice d) may be appropriate also. (i think you can argue that b and d are just different descriptions of the same method.)

3. d will randomize the birds, but may not guarantee there are 10 in each group. e will do both, so seems the better choice.

comment on question 2

based on the problem statement, it seems clear that confident, attentive drivers are more likely to use daytime running lights. so, the protocol might need to be devised in such a way that the lights would be turned on or off without the driver's knowledge. (an attentive driver will figure it out.) assigning a confident, attentive driver to a group required to drive without running lights might mess with his/her confidence and attentiveness. you don't want your experiment to do that. (nor do you want the experiment to subject a driver to greater risk of accident as a consequence of driving without running lights.) experiments involving human safety are always problematic.

answerlinnaeus;