(A) doesn’t involve some pattern we can observe in the surviving text. So it’s not analogous to the kind of evidence used by Steele. (A) involves discovery of a different text; but Steele’s evidence doesn’t involve use of a different set of genes.

This doesn’t involve a pattern we can observe in the surviving text. (B) involves a separate piece of evidence suggesting alteration. But Steele’s evidence doesn’t involve something besides the genes; he doesn’t bring up something outside of genes to show that the genes have been passed through altered DNA in reproductive cells.

This doesn’t involve a pattern we can observe in the surviving text. (C) involves a separate piece of evidence suggesting alteration. But Steele’s evidence doesn’t involve something besides the genes; he doesn’t bring up something outside of genes to show that the genes have been passed through altered DNA in reproductive cells.

This doesn’t involve a pattern we can observe in the surviving text. (D) involves a separate piece of evidence suggesting alteration. But Steele’s evidence doesn’t involve something besides the genes; he doesn’t bring up something outside of genes to show that the genes have been passed through altered DNA in reproductive cells. For example, he doesn’t bring up the genes that offspring would have based on the original DNA and compare that to the actual set of genes.

Vocabulary in the surviving text is analogous to the pattern of mutations. Just as vocabulary from a later era is a sign that parts of the text are not original, Steele believes the pattern of mutations in the genes are a sign that parts of the genes do not come from the original DNA. (E) is the only answer that involves evidence from the surviving text itself — we can look at the surviving text and certain things in the text can indicate changes have occurred in the text. No other answer involves evidence we can observe in the text itself.