The magical words in this question are "four holes", "was developed and used thousands of years", and "before it was adopted by WM" A: Could be, but since there is no such info found within the Q, this is irrelevent B: Without E, this would be an attractive "inaccurate response", let's first leave it here C: Again, this is just flat-out irrelevent D: Could be, but it has nothing to do in supporting the hypothesis. E: This is it. The right answer. It's better if we use the denial test. If in fact, the bone was only long enough to make 4 notes instrument, then the later 6 notes one would have to be developed by morden WM, thus making the whole hypothese incorrect. so by the same token, in its right form, E just provide the strongest reason showing that the ancient ancestor indeed developed a 6 notes (though it just happened that the one that was found has been broken to have just 4), and the present 6 notes is just a simple adoption of the old one. Hope that help |