PT5.S1.Q7 - Two paleontologists, Dr. Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree

moonstars5678

Can someone please explain why A is correct? Here was my initial breakdown/reasoning for why I thought E was the right point of issue:

Stim: There were some footprints found.
Dr. T: These are obviously hominid footprints because they have some human characteristics.
Dr. R: No Dr. T, these are not obviously hominid footprints because if you're right, then these hominids would've walked in a really weird way that's unlikely

ACs:
A: Originally got rid of A because it seemed like they both acknowledged the significance of the evidence, just that they interpreted the "squarish heel and a big toe etc" evidence differently in terms of what it meant

B: Neither of them really touch on this - seems like they both agree this set of footprints is at least somewhat distinguishable

C: Gait? Isn't mentioned by either

Dr. R isn't saying that this isn't enough evidence to support T's conclusion, she's saying that the evidence doesn't support the conclusion

E: R mentions how weird it would be if the hominids walked "in an unexpected cross-stepping manner, by placing the left foot to the right of the right foot," which I assumed was just walking upright. Hence why I chose E

help

LivinLaVidaLSAT

Each palenontologist focuses on various apsects (different parts) of the evidence (the footprints) to support their conclusion. They're both looking at the same evidence but each thinks their chosen aspect is more important in reaching a conclusion. So, this makes A correct. The phrase "relative significance" is important in the answer.

Stimulus:
Dr. T is focused on the footprint shape. Human characteristics, so early homonid.

Dr. R is focused on the footprint pattern. Cross-stepping pattern (unlike humans), so probably not early homonid. Dr. R feels this is reason enough to disagree with Dr. T which means this is the more important aspect in interpreting the evidence.

Typical plan of attack for point of issue questions, is to find the answer that states a claim one person would agree with while the other person would disagree. Some minimal rephrashing of the answers into such a statement was needed for this question; I havent looked at the LSAT in awhile but I think the phrasing of the answer choices wasn't typical for this question type.

Wrong answers:

B: yes, both agree, necessary assumption to argument they are both making

C: gait, a manner of walking, is mentioned by Dr. R. Uses the footprints to determine gait. He would agree that this is possible. Dr. T doesn't comment on this.

D: both agree, a necessary assumption for both since they both only reference the evidence from this site to reach their conclusion

E: Dr. R would agree since his evidence is the unusual gait. Again, Dr. T doesn't comment on gait, so you can't say he disagrees. Tha's why this answer wouldn't work.

Sidenote: In case you're wondering how to get "D:"to appear correctly instead of the smiley face , you can type "D \ :" without the spaces. The forward slash stops the emoji character. I'm not a code person so I can't expound on why that works.