#22 - Archaeologist: After the last ice age, groups of

[karen_k]

Hi,

I narrowed down the answer choices to A and B and ended up picking B. Can you please explain why B is wrong and what makes A a better choice? Thank you!

[Anthony Esposito]

Hi Karen,

Let's see what's up with these paleohumans and their Clovis points.

First, let's look at what makes Answer Choice (A) the correct answer choice. First, we know from the question stem this is a strengthen question. The last sentence in the stimulus is the conclusion.

Well, if (as Answer Choice (A)) states, the Clovis points found in Siberia are older than nay of those that have been found in North America, it sounds like Clovis point was more likely invented in Siberia (because wherever something is originally invented we would expect to find the oldest versions of that thing) than in North America (where it seems like Clovis points were made or took, but not until after they were mad in Siberia). This would strengthen the conclusion, so it is the correct answer.

Answer Choice (B) is incorrect because the disappearance of the Bering land bridge before any of the Clovis points found to date were made has no effect on the author's (it doesn't strengthen or weaken) argument that the Clovis point was not invented in North America. May I assume that you picked Answer Choice (B) because you thought that the disappearance of the land bridge meant that it would stop people from carrying Clovis points from North America to Siberia or visa versa?

Hope this helps,
Anthony

[karen_k]

Hi Anthony,

Thank you for explaining why A is correct. And yes, that is what I assumed when I chose B, but I am still confused as to how B has no effect on the argument. Could you please elaborate on that? Thank you!

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hey Karen,

Let me jump in real quick and answer your question about why (B) is incorrect. According to (B), the bridge disappeared before any of the Clovis points found to date were made. So, whoever made the Clovis point they just found in Siberia must have stayed in Siberia after it was made. Fine, but how old are the Siberian clovis points they found? Don't let answer choice (A) cloud your judgment - we don't know how old they were, which is a problem. Maybe they had been making Clovis points for thousands of years, before the Bering land bridge disappeared, and so it's entirely possible that someone brought them to Siberia from North America. All we know from answer choice (B) is that the bridge disappeared before the known Clovis points were made. This tells us nothing about the timeline of the Clovis point or who came up with it first.

Does this make more sense?

Thanks!

[LAM]

I too had trouble with this question. I also originally chose B, but went back before I graded the test and chose A. The reason I chose A upon review was because of the word INVENTED. The stimulus wasn't telling us really anything about when or if they were produced. Production - 'making' is different than invention. Originally I chose B because according to that answer choice, of course the bridge disappeared and then the Clovis spear was obviously made after that disappearance, so I reasoned they couldn't have come from North America - there was no way they could have been carried back to Serbia - there was no bridge. Answer choice B seemed so right. But when I reexamined the question, I saw the word "invented" and for me that illuminated the correct answer. Is it plausible they were INVENTED in North America, some dudes crossed the bridge and told the people in Serbia how to make them (they saw them, used them there etc but didn't bring any back). The bridge disappears somehow and the people start making them in Serbia after the bridge disappears? I reasoned, yes, this was plausible. So the bridge disappearing before the Clovis spear was made in Serbia could not help prove the conclusion - which is that the point was NOT INVENTED in North America. It all hinged on the word "invented" (versus actually making them) for me.
Now, with this thinking in mind, please correct me if I am wrong in this train of thought. Thanks in advance.

[Francis O'Rourke]

It looks like you have a decent understanding of the information here, but I do want to add a few things:

It seems from your post that you are saying that production and invention are completely separate. There is an important distinction that you identify. You also need to keep in mind that there is a connection: if you produce a spearhead, you or someone else has to have invented it.

Even if people in Siberia invented Clovis spearheads, people in North America might have invented Clovis spearheads independently (there's historical evidence for similar independent inventions such as writing and agriculture). So if you assume that the production of Clovis spearheads in Siberia only started after a land bridge disappeared, that would weaken the conclusion - if you assume that people in North America also had Clovis spearheads (which the stimulus implies) then it would have been less likely for them to get information from Siberia after the Bering land bridge disappeared. Choice (A) lessons the chance that Clovis spearheads were invented in North America first or at all.

[LAM]

Francis, yes - thank you for that addition. I never considered the possibility of them being invented separately.

[avengingangel]

Wow - this question really had me stumped between a & b. i don't know how many times i re-read it! but your explanation nikki, about not letting answer A "cloud your judgement" was sooo helpful - that's exactly what i did ! i was thinking B was saying that the clovis points they found were the oldest and that they were found after the bridge disappeared. but the clovis points could be the last ones ever made !! so there could have been plenty of travel back and forth before these found ones were ever made, which doesn't help the argument at all thanks !!!!!!!!

[AthenaDalton]

Wow - this question really had me stumped between a & b. i don't know how many times i re-read it! but your explanation nikki, about not letting answer A "cloud your judgement" was sooo helpful - that's exactly what i did ! i was thinking B was saying that the clovis points they found were the oldest and that they were found after the bridge disappeared. but the clovis points could be the last ones ever made !! so there could have been plenty of travel back and forth before these found ones were ever made, which doesn't help the argument at all thanks !!!!!!!!

I'm glad you're catching on! Keep up the good work!

[NolaB]

I think I'm catching on, but I wanted to review my thinking on this one! Sometimes, I find it useful to imagine scenarios that would prove an answer choice wrong. "Identifying the Possibilities," so to speak, can help me see my way around an answer choice with confusing wording.

I, too, chose B, and going back over it I think I see where B might not prove anything. Let's say the land bridge disappeared in year 3. We find North American clovis points made in year 4. For all we know from the stimulus, the clovis points in Siberia were made in year 5. The fact that the land bridge disappeared before any clovis points were made changes nothing.

I didn't personally find it useful to think about how they were the oldest clovis points "found to date," because answer choice A allows for the possibility that there are even older North American Clovis points buried somewhere that we simply haven't found yet. Does that make sense?