The legend of King Arthur is well-known in literature. Based on Unsolved Mysteries of History, there is little to suggest it is true. Do you think it is important for people to believe in legends like King Arthur even if there is little evidence to support them? Why or why not?

Even though there is little evidence to prove the historical existance of King Arthur, I think it is important to learn about his legend and values of the time. First of all, Arthur's story gives us a hint of what England was like during the period before it was unified into one kingdom. In this way, we can learn about what life was like then and what principles were considered important. Secondly, I think there is still a lot to discover about his legend. As a result, the more we study it and do research, the closer we will be of finding more evidence regarding his life as a historical character.

hancock was president of congress when the declaration of independence was adopted and signed. he is primarily remembered by americans for his large, flamboyant signature on the declaration, so much so that "john hancock" became, in the united states, an informal synonym for signature.

explanation:

for this case, we must find the number of deaths per day of the year 2015, in automobile accidents, knowing that 32,400 people died.

knowing that the year 2015 had 365 days we have the following division:

where "x" represents the number of deaths per day.

rounding off we have:

approximately, 89 people per day died in 2015

answer:

89 people per day