Is the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south different from the proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west? 412 of the 568 randomly selected wildfires looked at in the south were caused by humans while 320 of the 503 randomly selected wildfires looked at the west were caused by humans. What can be concluded at the o = 0.01 level of significance? a. For this study, we should use Select an answer b. The null and alternative hypotheses would be: Ho: Select an answer ) Select an answer ) Select an answer ) (please enter a decimal) H1: Select an answer Select an answer @ Select an answer @ (Please enter a decimal) c. The test statistic ? @) = (please show your answer to 3 decimal places.) d. The p-value = (Please show your answer to 4 decimal places.) e. The p-value is ? a f. Based on this, we should Select an answer @ the null hypothesis. g. Thus, the final conclusion is that ... The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of the 568 wildfires that were caused by humans in the south is different from the proportion of the 503 wildfires that were caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is statistically significant evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is equal to the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically significant at a = 0.01, so there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is different from the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west. O The results are statistically insignificant at a = 0.01, so there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the south is different from the population proportion of wildfires caused by humans in the west