According to a theory advanced
by researcher Paul Martin, the wave
of species extinctions that occurred
Line in
(5) ago, at the end of the Pleistocene era,
can be directly attributed to the arrival
of humans, i.e., the Paleoindians, who
were ancestors of modern Native
Americans. However, anthropologist
(10) Shepard Krech points out that large
animal species vanished even in areas
where there is no evidence to demon-
strate that Paleoindians hunted them.
Nor were extinctions confined to large
(15) animals: small animals, plants, and
insects disappeared, presumably not
all through human consumption. Krech
also contradicts Martin’s exclusion of
climatic change as an explanation by
(20) asserting that widespread climatic
change did indeed occur at the end of
the Pleistocene. Still, Krech attributes
secondary if not primary responsibility
for the extinctions to the Paleoindians,
(25) arguing that humans have produced
local extinctions elsewhere. But,
according to historian Richard White,
even the attribution of secondary
responsibility may not be supported
(30) by the evidence. White observes that
Martin’s thesis depends on coinciding
dates for the arrival of humans and the
decline of large animal species, and
Krech, though aware that the dates
(35) are controversial, does not challenge
them; yet recent archaeological
discoveries are providing evidence
that the date of human arrival was
much earlier than 11,000 years ago.
“Still, Krech attributes
secondary if not primary responsibility for the extinctions to the Paleoindians, (25) arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere. ”这句话是什么意思，什么叫secondary if not primary ，后面argue的这个evidence是K的观点么？
secondary if not primary responsibility
for the extinctions to the Paleoindians,
(25) arguing that humans have produced
local extinctions elsewhere. ”这句话是什么意思，什么叫secondary if not primary ，后面argue的这个evidence是K的观点么？
K把人类的责任放次要, PM是把人类的责任放成主要, "secondary if not primary responsibility" 是说K在这观点上和Paul Martin是很相似, 就基本同意PM的观点, 所以author说"secondary if not primary responsibility". 这话也是为下面文章铺前言, 因为紧跟着就是WHITE对K的观点和PM的观点双批评. 就是说K和PM差不多, 虽然K和PM的有些观点不同, 他们两都是把人类造成绝种放在第一或第二, 他们两个还是疏忽了一个大因素.
Q6:
Which of
the following, if true, would most weaken Krech’s objections to Martin’s
theory?
A.
Further studies showing that the climatic
change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe and
widespread than was previously believed
B.
New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians
made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct
C.
Additional evidence indicating that
widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era
but also in previous and subsequent eras
D.
Researchers’ discoveries that many more
species became extinct in North America at the
end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed
E.
New discoveries establishing that both the
arrival of humans in North America and the
wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago
为什么选B不选C
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GWD6-Q7:
In the
last sentence of the passage, the author refers to “recent archaeological
discoveries” (lines 36-37) most probably in order to
A.
refute White’s suggestion that neither
Maritn nor Krech adequately account for Paleoindians’ contributions to the
Pleistocene extinctions
B.
cast doubt on the possibility that a more
definitive theory regarding the causes of the Pleistocene extinctions may be
forthcoming
C.
suggest that Martin’s, Krech’s, and White’s
theories regarding the Pleistocene extinctions are all open to question
D.
call attention to the most controversial
aspect of all the current theories regarding the Pleistocene extinctions
E.
provide support for White’s questioning of
both Martin’s and Krech’s positions regarding the role of Paleoindians in the
Pleistocene extinctions
为什么选E不选C
这两题都不懂啊 求救~
感觉文章都看懂了 反而错了多了
不知道这样理解可以么-Krech认为（气候变化）是主要杀手，人类活动间接造成了灭绝，成为次要杀手。
q6-k 说动物灭绝主要不是人干的，可是发现人玩过小动物，那说明可能主要是人干的，消弱K.
C 没有消弱K，而是重复加强了K。
Q 7, yet 证明M,K have some flaws, but W no error
so C is wrong.
数据显示人类出现的时间比11000年还早就能说明灭绝与人类无关？那现在的很多动物灭绝也跟人类无关了咯？
| 欢迎光临 国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA (http://forum.topway.org/) | Powered by Discuz! 7.2 |