Read the excerpt from "Bone Detective," by Lorraine Jean Hopping.

The Hunley recovery team planned to display Diane’s casts in a museum that was about to be built. But did the casts belong in a public exhibit? Some people objected to displaying soldiers' remains—even though they were plastic replicas. Diane saw nothing wrong with it. In fact, she had no qualms about showing the real bones.

"If people want to really learn about the soldiers,” she said, "you have to show the bones. The bone is a record of a person’s life, especially the last part—the circumstances of death.”

How and why did the Hunley sink? What can we learn about the lives—and deaths—of its ill-fated crew? Scientists will likely be investigating the answers for years to come, thanks in part to Diane’s casts.

Which statement best describes Hopping’s viewpoint and purpose in this excerpt?

A ] The author believes Diane France should not display soldiers’ remains, and she writes to persuade readers to avoid visiting the museum.

B ] The author thinks a Union warship caused the submarine to sink, and she writes to inform readers about the war.

C ] The author thinks stories about the Civil War are interesting, and she writes to entertain readers with true war stories.

D ] The author believes Diane France’s work in making bone casts has helped many scientists, and she writes to give details about her experiences.

go

explanation:

because it can't be a slow, i would say possibly whoa, but there's nothing too surprising about orange juice, and because it tastes awesome it's a go drink, not food.

no, i never do because that’s not the reason for what i speak to or of.

yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

it is yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

hope this