- UID
- 647690
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2011-7-5
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
我觉得应该不是这篇,但是考古出来的第一个版本说的跟这篇实在太像了,但是这篇文章没提到m开头的生物,大家看看吧~ 【考古】 【版本1】 第一段:P时期大动物灭绝很快,最早在亚非,接着到澳洲和美洲(都有具体年份说明的,比如15000年前),好奇怪。为什么呢?学者A说是因为人类活动。因为这些时间都对应着相应地区的人类频繁活动。为了进一步说明,A还说一:灭绝的都是那种又大又笨的,容易被人抓到,二:亚非的大动物灭绝的不如澳美的 drastically,是因为人类是突然到澳美洲的,大动物都来不及反应。(有题问道亚非动物灭绝的为什么比澳美缓慢) 第二段:顺承上文,继续支持A(没有问道问题,没记得很多)不过有说道,历史上如果由CLIMATE造成的物种灭绝都是更大范围,而且大物种,小物种一起灭绝的,但这个P时段的灭绝只涉及大物种,所以还是认为还是人类干涉而不是气候。 第三段:但是这个解释又两个counterargument,(但最后还是被作者反对掉了,说明作者是支持A的)counterargument一:根据fossil,P时代人类主要靠collect植物什么的过活,化石没有反映出人类hunting,作者反对,提出一句话:if hunting evidences are "small", then the collecting evidence are nonexistent. (这句话有考题,但有点忘了);counterargument二:在那个时代人类捕猎水平不够,根本不可能造成那么多物种灭绝,说道要用rifle之类的才能造成,另外还说到,大动物如果被捕猎死的话,死相会有挣扎的痕迹,但是没有。最后作者还是把这个反对了下(没仔细看了)。
GWD6-Q5 to Q7: 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. |
|