The surface, or rim, of a canyon is at an altitude of 60 m. on a hike down into the canyon, a party of hikers stops for a rest 137 m below the rim. then they descend another 57 m. what was their new altitude?

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?

Me with geometry ! in this figure, bc is a perpendicular bisects of kj. dm is the angle bisects of bdj. what is the measure of bdm? •60° •90° •30° •45°

Can someone me with these two circle theorem questions asap?