People on either side of the smartphones-for-teens debate can't agree on the evidence. sure, there's proof of cyber bullying. there's also proof of educational benefits. yet nothing is conclusive, so no valid judgment can be made for everyone on whether smartphones should be banned from teens. anyone supporting such a restriction is naïve and uniformed. he or she is reacting from emotion instead of using his or her brain to study all the evidence and make a decision specific to his or her own teen. the bottom line is it's up to parents to be parents. why spend billions of dollars on trying to stop cyber bullying or explore educational apps? it's probably just another human assumption that we can control the technology we've created. trying is a waste of time and money.

which of the following is true about this argument excerpt?

a)it is respectful in tone to the audience and supports its claim with specific, credible evidence.
b)it contains specific, credible evidence but uses a disrespectful tone that should be edited.
c) it fails to support its claim with specific, credible evidence and uses a disrespectful tone.
d)it uses a respectful tone but needs specific, credible evidence to support the claim.

It fails to support its claim with specific, credible evidence and uses a disrespectful tone.

Explanation:

When giving arguments in favor or against a specific subject, they must be supported by reason and logic as well as credible evidence that can be compared with reality. They also need to be coherent with the things you are stating, this has to be done in a respectful tone as you are open to the idea of others comments and counterarguments. You are supposed to show you are right with these arguments, not by insulting or despising others.

In my opinion, this excerpt fails in both. It is not respectful and it's arguments are not strong enough.

He states that there is not proof of who is right or wrong on the debate adressed, he needs to support this with evidence. Who states that?

He the concludes that "no valid judgment can be made for everyone on whether smartphones should be banned from teens." This seems as an opinion based on his own reasoning.

After this, he starts making judgments about the people supporting the restriction, calling them naïve. This is not polite or useful. As I said, this is not based on evidence, he is contradicting himself as he stated in the first lines that there was no evidence of who was rigth or wrong.

The next lines express just his opinions based on his values and thoughts, evidence to support them is never presented.

-X *heart*

she might be shy, amzed or in love.

explanation:

mark brainliest, , and rate

gerund phrase: giving more than a person needs.

noun use: predicate noun.