Astudent argues that the scientific theory of the atom is not useful because it has undergone so many changes over time. which best argues against the student's reasoning?

I don't see any list of arguments to choose from.

Personally, I would only point out to the student that the scientific

theory of bacteria, viruses, "germs" and infectious diseases has

been changing constantly for almost 250 years, and has undergone

at least twice as many changes as the theory of the structure and

Physics of atoms.

I would then ask him whether he's had his flu shot this year, and

how useful he feels our current understanding of vaccines and

contagious diseases in general is now, after all the changes.

im srry but ur wrong the answer is d a smooth rock, some red dirt, and an empty bird's nest.