0
If all Bloobs are Toogs and no Toogs are Goppers then you can be certain that absolutely no Goppers are Bloobs?
Wiki User
∙ 16y ago
Yes. No Goppers are Bloobs and No Bloobs are Goppers. :]
Wiki User
∙ 16y ago
Anonymous
neither
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
If some toogs are bekes and some bekes are broons. are toogs definitely broons?
no, but broons are deff toogs, lol
If some toogs are bloogs and all gleems are bloogs then some toogs are gleems True or False?
"All gleems are bloogs" leaves room for the possibility that there are a lot of bloogs that are not gleems. Yes, everytime you see a gleem, you can assume he is a bloog, but when you see a bloog, you don't know for certain whether he is a gleem or not. "Some toogs are bloogs" doesn't tell us whether any of the toogs are gleems. The toogs could be the bloogs that are not gleems for all we know. So, we do not have enough information to determine whether any toogs are gleems. They could be. Nothing in the statements excludes that possibility. But the information we are given does not prove whether or not they are. So the answer your teacher is probably looking for is "false." =================================================== Let me give you another explanation: Some airplanes are toys. (They make toy airplanes.) All teddy bears are toys. Therefore, some airplanes are teddy bears: true or false? Some snacks are cookies. All Oreos are cookies. Therefore, some snacks are Oreos: true or false? Airplanes are not teddy bears. But some snacks are Oreos. It could go either way. The original question does not have enough information to determine the answer.
If all bloods are toogs and no toogs are goppers then can we be certain that absolutely no goppers are blood?
No you cannot. It would be different if "all boolds" but the question clearly states "al bloods".
Can you please explain how if all bloobs are toogs and no toogs are goopers then you can be certain that no goopers are bloobs is true?
Consider a bloob. Because it is a bloob, and ALL bloops are toogs, it must also be a toog. But if it is a toog then, because no toogs are goopers, it cannot be a gooper. So if it a bloob it cannot be a gooper. That is to say no gooper can be a bloob.
If some toogs are bekes and some bekes are broons. are toogs definitely broons?
no, but broons are deff toogs, lol
If some Toogs are Bekes and some Bekes are Broons then some Toogs are definitely Broons This statement is true or false?
False, the Bekes who are Broons are not necessarily among the Bekes who are Toogs.
If some toogs are bloogs and all gleems are bloogs then some toogs are gleems True or False?
"All gleems are bloogs" leaves room for the possibility that there are a lot of bloogs that are not gleems. Yes, everytime you see a gleem, you can assume he is a bloog, but when you see a bloog, you don't know for certain whether he is a gleem or not. "Some toogs are bloogs" doesn't tell us whether any of the toogs are gleems. The toogs could be the bloogs that are not gleems for all we know. So, we do not have enough information to determine whether any toogs are gleems. They could be. Nothing in the statements excludes that possibility. But the information we are given does not prove whether or not they are. So the answer your teacher is probably looking for is "false." =================================================== Let me give you another explanation: Some airplanes are toys. (They make toy airplanes.) All teddy bears are toys. Therefore, some airplanes are teddy bears: true or false? Some snacks are cookies. All Oreos are cookies. Therefore, some snacks are Oreos: true or false? Airplanes are not teddy bears. But some snacks are Oreos. It could go either way. The original question does not have enough information to determine the answer.
