Self-study
Some paleontologists believe that certain species of dinosaurs guarded their young in protective nests long after the young hatched. ██ █████████ ████ ████ ███ █████████ ██ ██████████ █████████ ██████ ███ ███████████ ██ █████████ ████████ ██████ ███ ███████ █████ ███ ██████████ ███ ███████████ ███ ███████████ ██ ██████ ███████████ ████ ██████ ██████████ █████ █████ █████ ████ ███ █ ████ █████ ████ █████ ████ ██████ ██████ ████████
Stimulus Summary
Some paleontologists look at fossilized hadrosaur nests, see babies and adolescents in them, and conclude that hadrosaurs guarded their young long after the young hatched. The author points out that modern crocodiles build similar nests for their hatchlings and adolescents despite guarding their young for only a very brief period.
So the nest evidence doesn't actually guarantee the paleontologists' conclusion. The crocodile analogy proves that "carefully designed nests with hatchlings and adolescents in them" is perfectly compatible with very brief guarding.
Anticipation
"Hence" introduces the author's conclusion. The author has shown that one specific piece of evidence (the nests) doesn't establish long-term guarding. That supports the conclusion that the paleontologists' argument isn't convincing. Let's look for something along those lines in the answer choices.
13.
Which one of the following ████ █████████ █████████ ███ █████████
a
paleontologists who believe ████ ██████████ ███████ █████ █████ ████ █████ ███ █████ ███████ ████ ██ ████████ ██ ███████ ████ ██████
The author criticizes the strength of the nest evidence, not the existence of the evidence itself. The paleontologists do have evidence: the nests with hatchlings and adolescents in them. The author's argument shows that this evidence isn't convincing evidence of long-term guarding (because crocodile nests look the same despite brief guarding), but inconclusive evidence is still evidence.
b
we will never ██ ████ ██ ████ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ██████████ ███████ █████ █████
The author criticizes one specific piece of evidence (the nests), not the prospects for ever learning about hadrosaur parenting. Maybe future research using different evidence (parental fossil positioning, behavioral inference from related species) could eventually settle the question. "Never" is too extreme to be supported here.
c
hadrosaurs guarded their █████ ███ ██ ████ ████ █████ ███████ █████ ████████
The author has shown that the nest evidence is inconclusive, but inconclusive evidence doesn't prove the opposite. The nests are still consistent with long-term guarding; they're just also consistent with brief guarding.
d
it is unclear ███████ ████ ██ █████ █████ ██████████ ████ █████ ██████████ ███████ █████ ██ ████████ █████ █████ █████████
The argument isn't about whether hadrosaur fossils generalize to other dinosaurs. It's about whether the nest evidence specifically supports the long-term-guarding claim about hadrosaurs. The crocodile comparison isn't being used to argue that hadrosaurs are unique among dinosaurs. It's being used to show that the nest evidence is compatible with two very different parenting styles.
e
the construction of █████ ███ ██████████ ███ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████ ████████ ███ ███ ████████████████ ██████
This fits naturally in the blank. The crocodile analogy shows that "carefully designed nests with hatchlings and adolescents" is compatible with brief guarding. So the same evidence in hadrosaurs is compatible with brief guarding too, which means it isn't strong support for the long-term-guarding conclusion. (E) doesn't go too far, unlike (A) and (C). (E) says only that the evidence isn't strong, not that it doesn't exist or that the opposite is true.