Self-study
Conclusion A plausible explanation of the disappearance of the dinosaurs is what is known as the comet theory. █ █████ ██████ █████ █████████ ████ █████ █████ ████ ██████ █ █████ ██ ████ ████ ██████████ ███ ██████ ███ ██████ ███ ███████ ████ ██████ ██ ██████ ██ ███ ██████████ ███████
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that the comet theory is a plausible explanation of the dinosaurs’ extinction. This is based on the idea that a collision of a large enough comet into the Earth could have caused a dust cloud that could have cooled the climate long enough to cause the extinction of the dinosaurs.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that a large enough comet existed and could have collided with Earth at the time in question. He also assumes that the impact would cause a dust cloud that would cover the planet, and that this would cool the climate long enough to lead to the dinosaurs’ extinction. (The author says that these events “could” happen––we don’t know their likelihood. It could be a very slim possibility.) The author assumes that, even if these events occurred, the cooling caused by the comet is what led to the dinosaurs’ extinction.
18.
Which one of the following ███████████ ██ █████ ████ █████████ ███████ ███ █████████
a
One of the ███████ ███████ ██ ████████████ ███████ ██ ██ ███████████ ███ ███ █████████████ ██ ███ █████████ ████ ██ █████████████ █████████ ████ ███ █████ ███████
The author is only arguing that the comet theory is plausible; the fact that other theories differ from the comet theory doesn’t weaken the argument. It doesn’t weaken our argument that other plausible explanations may exist.
b
Various species of ███████ ████ ███ ████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ███ ███████ ██ ████ ██ ██████████ ███ ███████ ███ ███ ██████ ███████ ████ ███ █████████ ████
(B) suggests that the extinction of the dinosaurs was driven by some factor that differentiated dinosaurs from other animals with similar habitat and climate needs. If the comet theory was true, animals with similar physiology and habitat to dinosaurs would have gone extinct too.
Plausibility
Plausibility
Presenting evidence that corroborates (in Strengthen) or conflicts (in Weaken) with the author's hypothesized explanation or the predictions that follow from that explanation.
c
It cannot be ██████████ ████ █ █████ ██ ████████ █████████ ███████ ███ ███████ ████ ████ ███ ███████ ██ █ ████ ██████
(C) just says that one specific kind of evidence cannot be used. The inability to use skeletons as evidence does not weaken the argument that the comet theory is plausible. (C) makes the inappropriate assumption that skeletons are the only source of information available.
Illusory inconsistency
Illusory inconsistency
Answer is attractive because it seems to (but doesn't actually) contradict the premises or conclusion. In other words, it feints an attack on the premises or conclusion. If correlation is present, the answer choice is often merely an outlier datapoint, which is actually entirely consistent with the correlation.
d
Many other animal ███████ ████ ███ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ███ ███ ██████ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ███ █████████ ████
(D) is too broad. The animal species referenced in (D) could have had vastly different requirements for habitat and climate. It makes sense that some animals survived the incident that killed the dinosaurs.
e
The consequences for ██████████ ███ ███████ ██ █ █████ █████████ ████ █████ ███ ███ █████ ███████████
The argument that the comet theory is plausible doesn’t require a full understanding of the impacts of a comet collision on plants and animals, so (E) does not impact the argument.
Illusory inconsistency
Illusory inconsistency
Answer is attractive because it seems to (but doesn't actually) contradict the premises or conclusion. In other words, it feints an attack on the premises or conclusion. If correlation is present, the answer choice is often merely an outlier datapoint, which is actually entirely consistent with the correlation.