What does explain how your example and evidence tie into your topic mean

Your topic usually makes a statement (like a thesis statement), right? To support your topic, you give examples and evidence. But here's what it means to tie evidence into the topic: you have to have a clear link or transition between topic and evidence or example. The link can be keywords or phrases that show the connection between statement to supporting evidence.

Example: If my topic is "Dogs are loud," and my evidence is that dogs bark, then I need to prove that dogs bark loudly. (Let me pull some numbers out of thin air here.)

I could state, "Dogs produce noise levels that are unsafe for human ears within a proximity of ten meters," and support that with: "Dogs produce high levels of vibrations when they bark. On average, a dog's bark is no quieter than 50 decibels, and can get as loud as 100 decibels. These levels of volume cause ever-so-much-any-number-will-do damage to the human ear when heard from within ten meters distance." (fake numbers)

In this example, my example and evidence are intertwined in my stated average volume of dog barks and the damage that allegedly causes (it's fake evidence ok). I can explain the tie by also stating, "This amount of damage to the ear is unsafe because it is irreparable, causes great pain to the human, and may lead to them going deaf." (None of which is true... I think.) Can you see the tie? If not I can try another explanation.

its confident and professional

answer; i believe the correct answer is ( indirect characterization);