GWD11-7答案商榷

Q5 to Q7:

      According to a theory advanced

       by researcher Paul Martin, the wave

       of species extinctions that occurred

Line       in North America about 11,000 years

  (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.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Krech’s objections to Martin’s theory?

B正确
C 只是支持K得结论，没有WEAKEN得意思，而且包涵有逻辑题中一定要避免的东西比如but also in previous and subsequent eras这个跟题目的REASONING无关

B从上下文都是WEAKEN的比较好的方式

对，是B，我错了，谢谢

Nor were extinctions confined to large

(15)      animals:  small animals, plants, and

insects disappeared, presumably not

all through human consumption.

这一段在原文是什么意思啊? 它是谁的观点 在段落中起什么作用?

谢谢

为什么每人的

我同意LZ的C.

B不读是因为原文说"没有evidence表明vanish是人吃的".而B说的不是这个意思.

C对.

支持C，B只是说Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects，但不见得利用了这些东西就会导致他们灭亡（尽管这些 small animals, plants, and insects是用that became extinct来限定的）；C说在the end of the Pleistocene era之前和之后都有widespread climatic change，这就说明考虑气候改变的因素是多余的。