Paulo makes the argument that the asteroid strike that likely contributed to the extinction of the dinosaurs was a short-tem environmental change because it happened so quickly.

Which is the best analysis of Paulo’s position?

He is correct; it happened in just a few seconds.
He is correct; it did not cause any long-term changes.
He is incorrect; it caused long-term changes.
He is incorrect; impacts are not environmental changes.

3rd one.

Explanation:

I would say that because after the immediate results of the impact, the dust and debris settled into the atmosphere, blocking out the sun and creating a nuclear winter of sorts. I'd say the winter killed more dinosaurs than the asteroid impact.

C) He is incorrect; it caused long-term changes

Explanation:

coconut why: has water in it : )

the correct answer: the index of refraction of the second medium is lower i tried this persons answer and it was wrong this person is lying