#17 - On the basis of the available evidence, Antarctica has

[standardissuecat]

The explanations for why it's not C make sense to me, but I'm still somewhat confused about E's wording. It says "an inconsistency that, as presented, has more than one possible resolution...". But isn't only one possible resolution (i.e. that the Antarctic ice sheet must have temporarily melted 3 million years ago) presented for the inconsistency (i.e. the found fossils and the belief that Antarctica has been covered by ice for at least the past 14 million years)? Or am I interpreting this too literally, and it just means "the inconsistency, as laid out in the text as it is, has more than one possible resolution"?

[Robert Carroll]

standardissuecat,

The answer choice is not saying that the author presents one or many explanations. It's saying that the inconsistency has more than one possible explanation. And that's definitely true. Of course the author only recognizes one explanation, but the inconsistency the author has given admits of more than one. What the inconsistency "has" is objective - from the universal perspective, there can be more explanations. Subjectively, the author only sees one. I hope that helps!

Robert Carroll