In "check," which lines make up a rhyming couplet?

a.

"to everything that was without, / she could not put my candle out! "

b.

"along the sky, the ground, the air, / and in the room where i was hid! "

c.

"she crept and did not make a sound, / until she reached the tree: and then"

d.

"—i heard the rustling of her shawl / as she threw blackness everywhere"

the language of nature was a manifestation from god as he said "let there be light" and there was light the world began to assume visible, comprehensible form.

what ever we know now think of the old vision of creation we can be sure that with out the speaking of word -without language- we would have no science today with its striking power to illuminate the world.

question - in 1827, john walker, a druggist in a small english town, tipped a splint with sulphur, chlorate of potash, and sulphid of antimony, and rubbed it on sandpaper, and it burst into flame. the druggist had discovered the first friction-chemical match, the kind we use to-day. it is called friction-chemical because it is made by mixing certain chemicals together and rubbing them. although walker's match did not require the bottle of acid, nevertheless it was not a good one. it could be lighted only by hard rubbing, and it sputtered and threw fire in all directions. in a few years, however, phosphorus was substituted on the tip for antimony, and the change worked wonders. the match could now be lighted with very little rubbing, and it was no longer necessary to have sandpaper upon which to rub it. it would ignite when rubbed on any dry surface, and there was no longer any sputtering. this was the phosphorus match, the match with which we are so familiar. according the paragraph what was the benefit of the new phosphorus match? it burst into flame when rubbed on sandpaper. it was made by mixing chemicals. it could be ignited on any dry surface. it threw fire in all directions.

answer - matches required natural chemicals

for your question the answer would have to be france

answer; exaggerate what you believe is the deception and state it, hoping that the other will jump in to "correct" the statement;