a) In your opinion, which one of these criticisms was his most compelling argument? Why? (Remember: You do not have to agree with Niebuhr to objectively evaluate the effectiveness of his arguments.) b) Do you think any of his criticisms are relevant to immigrants in the U. S. today? If so, which criticism is valid and why? If not, why not?

scholarship, under the cloak of objective scientific knowledge production, thus reflects the identity and interests of the West, specifically the Anglo-American world, by encouraging its scholars to exclude non-Western systems of thought and using its theoretical perspectives to justify and perpetuate

Explanation:

So i would pick B

false

explanation:

option d is correct. corroborated sources of historical evidence   is necessary to validate a claim about an event in history.

historians tend to use written sources, but audio and visual materials as well as artifacts are important objects that supply information to modern historians.

historical sources are usually divided into two categories: primary and secondary sources. depending on the historian's intent, some sources shift their designation. determining what type of sources toimplement, and the level of credibility and reliability of those sources, is a significant step in critical thinking for the historian.

explanation: