Question

a student makes a comment that throughout human history, earth has had a fairly constant existence and so there is no reason to think that earth will change radically in the future. which statement best evaluates this students thinking? the students thinking is flawed because human history is very short and does not cover the length of time needed to observe extensive change on the planet. the students thinking is accurate because the stability we observe around us today is an indicator of stability in the future. the students thinking is accurate because we know about conditions on earth from human historical records dating back more than 2000 years. the students thinking is flawed because we cannot make predictions about the future.

Explanation:

Earth's history is vast compared to human - history. Human history is too short to observe long - term planetary changes. Just because Earth has seemed relatively stable during human history doesn't mean it won't change radically in the future.

Answer:

The student's thinking is flawed because human history is very short and does not cover the length of time needed to observe extensive change on the planet.