[阅读] BeyondGMAT阅读讲义2.17第四季冰川末期种群灭绝

plum42问道：
此题要求对K对M理论的反驳,做削弱。

K对M有两个反驳，一是说不是人造成大灭绝因为人不HUNTING的大动物也灭绝了，人不HUNTING的小东西也灭绝了。

B确实削弱了说史前印第安人利用这些后来灭绝的小东西，所以可能是人造成的灭绝，削弱了K的反驳。

可是C为什么不能选呢？K对M的第二个反驳是说气候改变也有可能是大灭绝的原因。C说在那个灭绝的ERA之前就有过气候改变了，那时却没发生大灭绝，说明了气候确实不是灭绝的原因，不也是削弱了K的反驳么？为什么不能选？是因为C的削弱力度不够？

望指教！谢谢！祝NICOLE姐越来越美！
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

原文：

According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, the wave of species extinctions that occurred in North America about 11,000 years 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 Shepard Krech points out that large animal species vanished even in areas where there is no evidence to demonstrate that Paleoindians hunted them. Nor were extinctions confined to large 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 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, arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere. But, according to historian Richard White, even the attribution of secondary responsibility may not be supported 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 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.

我的解答：

本帖隐藏的内容需要回复才可以浏览