Which statement best explains the equation x+3+3x+7=180 can be used to solve for ?

Here is their argument. given the obtuse angle x, we make a quadrilateral abcd with ∠dab = x, and ∠abc = 90◦, and ad = bc. say the perpendicular bisector to dc meets the perpendicular bisector to ab at p. then pa = pb and pc = pd. so the triangles pad and pbc have equal sides and are congruent. thus ∠pad = ∠pbc. but pab is isosceles, hence ∠pab = ∠pba. subtracting, gives x = ∠pad−∠pab = ∠pbc −∠pba = 90◦. this is a preposterous conclusion – just where is the mistake in the "proof" and why does the argument break down there?

Can someone 50 first drop menu 0.80 or 0.75 or 1.20 or 4.00 second drop menu 4.00 or 0.75 or 0.25 or 3.75 3rd 15,6,10, or 9 4th yes or no

Sole with work in 10 years, the average number of hours of tv watched per week by teenagers dropped from 23.9 to 21.4. find the percent of change.