Self-paced
From the tenth century until around the year 1500, there were Norse settlers living in Greenland. ██████ ████ █████ ███████ ██████ ████████████ ████ ████████ ██████████ ███ ████ ██████ █████ ████ ████ ███████████ ████ █████ ███ ███ █████ ███████████ ██ █████████ █████████ ███ ████ ███ █████ ███████████ ███ ████ ███████████ ██████ ██ ████████ ███████ █████ ████████ ████ █████ ████████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ █████████ ██████ ███ ████ ███ █████ ████████ ████ ██████ █████████ ██ ██████ ████ █████ █████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author looks to the disappearance of Norse settlements and concludes, contrary to what some people claim, that the Norse settlements did not disappear as a result of decreasing temperatures. As evidence, the author points out that Inuit settlers inhabiting Greenland during the same time continued to thrive long after the Norse settlers disappeared.
1.
Which one of the following, ██ █████ ████ █████ ███████ ███ ███ █████ ███████████ ██ █████████ ███████████ █████ ███ █████ ███████████ █████████
a
The drop in ███████ ██████ ███████████ ███ ███████ ██ █████████ ████ ██ ███ ██ ███ █████ ██ █ ██████
This affects both groups the same way, so it cannot explain why their fates differed. The Norse and the Inuit were both living in Greenland, so a smaller temperature drop there applied to both of them equally. If anything, a milder drop makes the cold a weaker reason for anyone disappearing. It gives us no reason the Norse would die out while the Inuit survived.
b
The Norse settlers' █████ ██████ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ███ █████ █████████ ██ █████████ ███ █████ ████ ████ ██████ ██ ███████ ███ ███████████ █████
This points to a real difference between the two groups and ties it straight to the cold. The Norse depended on livestock and crops that could not survive the temperature drop, while the Inuit did not. So when the climate cooled, the Norse food supply would have failed while the Inuit, getting food some other way, were unaffected. That is exactly the kind of unequal effect the puzzle calls for: the same cooling wrecks one group's way of feeding itself and leaves the other group's intact, which explains why the Norse settlements vanished while the Inuit settlements lasted.
c
There were settlements ██ █████ ███████ ██████ ███ █████████ ███████ ████ ████ ████ ██████ ███████ ██ █████ ████████ ███ ███ ████ ████ ██████████
This is about where some Norse may have gone, not about why their Greenland settlements failed while the Inuit's survived. Even if some Norse founded settlements in North America, that says nothing about how the temperature drop affected the two groups differently back in Greenland. The puzzle is the gap between the Norse and Inuit outcomes in the same place, and this leaves that gap unexplained.
d
The Inuit and ███ █████ ███████████ ████ █████████ ███████████ ██ ███████ ██████
This describes something the two groups shared, so it cannot account for the difference between them. If both the Inuit and the Norse settlements were typically in coastal areas, then being coastal is common ground, not a reason one group died out and the other did not. A trait that applies to both equally can never explain why their fates split.
e
The Norse community ██ ██████ █████████ ██ ██████ ████ █████ █████
This is about Norway, a different place with different conditions, so it does nothing to explain what happened in Greenland. The puzzle is why the Greenland Norse disappeared while the Greenland Inuit survived. How a separate Norse community fared back in Norway tells us nothing about how the temperature drop affected the two groups living side by side in Greenland.