When the question states there was no evidence of "increasing intensity" my mind goes to the possibility that it was already intense - hence supporting the outside the moon/earth system - and that an increase from a large amount of intensity to a crazy amount of intensity is not saying the same thing as there was no evidence found on Mars for the intensity of bombardment associated with the LHB. I got rid of this choice based on the ambiguity of increased intensity. How could have I approached this better without discounting this concept in other questions where it is important to recognize

In this paragraph, do we not get the perspective of the New Women writers? We get Chopin's perspective about them (embracing these ideas and methods for her book), but i see separately we get what the group labelled as New Women propose as well? Anybody agree or see where I'm going wrong?

The low res summary (LRS) indicates that "FWS argues natives' handicrafts were not traditional." I don't think that's the case for this LRS - the passage states that sea otter pelts were not to be used, but that doesn't mean other parts of the animals couldn't be used if it was part of a handicraft, what about bones from sea otters for small blades for example? I feel like the LRS takes a step to far in saying that the FWS didn't argued that natives' handicrafts were not traditional, just the pelts, at least that what I got from it, am I mis-reading this?