The following passage was written in the mid-1990s.
ββββββββ ββββ βββ βββββββ ββββββββββ βββ ββββββ βββ ββββββ βββββ βββββββββββ ββ ββββ βββββββ ββ βββ ββββ ββββββββββ ββββββββ ββ βββ βββββββββββ ββ ββββββββ ββββββββ ββ βββββββ ββββββ ββββββββββββ ββββββββββ βββ ββββ βββββ ββββββ βββββ βββββ ββββββββ ββββ βββββββ ββ ββββββββββ ββββββββ βββ βββββββ ββ βββ βββββββββ ββββ ββββββ βββ βββββ ββββββ βββββββ ββββββββ ββββ βββ ββββββ ββββββββ ββ βββββββ βββββββββββββββ ββββ ββ βββββ βββ ββββ ββ β ββββββ βββββββ ββββ βββ ββββ βββ ββββββββββ βββββββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββ βββββ ββββββ βββ
βββββ ββββββ ββββββββ βββ ββββββββββ ββββββ ββββ ββββββββ ββββββββββββ ββββ ββββββββ βββββ ββββ βββββββββ ββββ βββ ββββββββ ββ βββ βββββββ βββββββββββ βββββββββββ ββββ ββββββ βββββββ ββββββ ββββ ββββ ββββββ ββββ βββ ββββββββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββββββ βββββ βββ βββββββββ ββ ββββββββ βββ ββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββββ βββββββ βββ
βββββββ ββββββββ βββ ββββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββββ ββββββ βββββ ββββ ββββββββββ βββ ββββ βββββββββ ββ βββ βββββββ ββ βββ βββββββ βββββββββββ βββββββββββ ββ ββββββββββ ββ βββββ βββββββ ββββ ββββββββββββ ββ ββββββ ββ βββββββ βββββ ββ βββββ ββββββββββ βββββ ββββββββββ ββββ βββββββββ ββββββ ββββ βββββ ββββββββββ ββ βββ βββββ βββββββ ββββββββ βββ βββ ββββββ ββ ββββ β ββββββ ββββββββββββββββ ββββββββββββββ βββββββ βββββ ββββββββ βββ βββββββββββ βββββββββββ βββββββββββββ βββ
Which one of the following ββββ ββββββββββ βββββββββ βββ ββββββββ βββββββ βββ βββββββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββ βββββββββ βββ ββββ ββ βββ βββββ ββββββββββ
Two complementary theories ββββ βββ ββββββ ββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββ βββββββββ βββ ββββ ββββββββββ ββ βββ βββββ ββββββββββ βββββ βββ βββββ ββββββ ββ ββββββββββ ββββββββ ββ βββββ ββ βββ βββββββ
The author doesnβt compare two theories in P2. The author discusses the greenhouse theory and some evidence that was inconsistent with early models of the greenhouse effect. No other theory is discussed or compared to the greenhouse in theory in P2. (The solar fluctuation theory is discussed in P3.)
A theory that βββ ββββββ βββββ ββ ββ βββββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββ βββββββββ ββ βββββββββββ ββββββββ ββ βββ βββββ βββββββββ ββ βββββ ββ ββββββββββ ββββββββ ββββ ββββ βββββββ ββ βββ βββββββ
The author doesnβt reject the greenhouse theory. Nor does the author show greenhouse theory to be problematic in P2. Rather, the author shows how greenhouse theory is still plausible despite initially inconsistent evidence in P2.
A theory that βββ ββββββ βββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββ βββββββββ ββ βββββββββββ ββββββββ βββββ ββββββββ ββββββββββ ββββββββββββββ ββ βββ βββββ ββββββββββ
This best captures the relationship. The author discusses the greenhouse theory in P2. Then, after considering and rejecting the solar-fluctuation theory in P3 (βweighing additional considerationsβ), the author tentatively accepts the greenhouse theory. βTentativelyβ is acceptable as a description because the author doesnβt say that the greenhouse theory is definitely correct. He merely says that itβs the βbestβ explanation.
A theory that βββ ββββββ ββββββββ βββ βββββββ ββ βββ ββββββ βββββββββ ββ βββββββββββββ βββββββ ββ βββ βββββ βββββββββ ββ ββββββββ ββ βββ βββββββββ
The author doesnβt βsubstantially reviseβ the greenhouse theory in P3. Rather, the author rejects an alternative theory in P3 and accepts the greenhouse theory as it is described earlier in the passage.
A theory whose ββββββββ ββ ββββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββ ββ βββ ββββββ βββββββββ ββ βββββ ββ βββ βββββ βββββββββ ββ ββ ββββββββββ ββββ ββββββββ βββββ
The author does not question the validity of the greenhouse theory in P2. Although the author does acknowledge that early models of the greenhouse effect were inconsistent with observed data, and that