- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Thu Jul 05, 2018 5:35 pm
#47510
Complete Question Explanation
Specific Reference, Must Be True, Purpose/Function. The correct answer choice is D.
Since the question asks for the author's primary purpose in discussing the material in lines 26-35, it will be helpful for prephrasing purposes to review the immediate context in which those lines are situated. In other words, we need to review what the author discusses in paragraph 2 as a whole, in order to understand how lines 26-35 fit into that context.
Paragraph 2 begins by raising a potential weakness of (and objection to) the theory of a "greenhouse effect." The models predicted higher increases in temperature than were actually being observed. Paragraph 2 goes on to describe an adjustment to the models, which were neglecting an important factor: the counteracting effect that sulfates could have in lowering the earth's average temperature. Lines 26-35 provide detail about this counteracting effect, thus showing how a weakness in the greenhouse theory can be overcome by incorporating additional data (our prephrase).
Answer Choice (A): While the sulfates discussed in lines 26-35 could be construed as an "example," they are not an example of observations predicted by the greenhouse theory. Rather, they are an example of data the greenhouse theory did not originally consider, but that when considered eliminate a potential weakness in the theory's predictions.
Answer Choice (B): The purpose of the discussion of sulfates is not to argue for the need for a new theory. Rather, the sulfate discussion shows that an already-existing theory (greenhouse effect theory) does not necessarily need to be rejected.
Answer Choice (C): This answer choice fails for at least two reasons. There is nothing in the passage (at least up until the lines 26-35 discussion) to support the idea that greenhouse effect theory was a "previously accepted theory." In fact, it was described as "controversial" in the first paragraph. The more complex reason that answer choice C fails is that the discussion of sulfates is not something the author uses to demonstrate the failures of greenhouse theory ("the degree to which [it] . . . fails"). Rather, sulfates are discussed as a way to rescue greenhouse theory from certain objections.
Answer Choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. The answer choice fits our prephrase, by asserting that the discussion is about how a weakness can be overcome (i.e. "show that a certain theory . . . can be defended") by considering additional data ("in light of additional data").
Answer Choice (E): The discussion of sulfates is not intended to resolve a debate between two competing theories (after all, only one theory is on the table), but rather to respond to an objection to a single theory.
Specific Reference, Must Be True, Purpose/Function. The correct answer choice is D.
Since the question asks for the author's primary purpose in discussing the material in lines 26-35, it will be helpful for prephrasing purposes to review the immediate context in which those lines are situated. In other words, we need to review what the author discusses in paragraph 2 as a whole, in order to understand how lines 26-35 fit into that context.
Paragraph 2 begins by raising a potential weakness of (and objection to) the theory of a "greenhouse effect." The models predicted higher increases in temperature than were actually being observed. Paragraph 2 goes on to describe an adjustment to the models, which were neglecting an important factor: the counteracting effect that sulfates could have in lowering the earth's average temperature. Lines 26-35 provide detail about this counteracting effect, thus showing how a weakness in the greenhouse theory can be overcome by incorporating additional data (our prephrase).
Answer Choice (A): While the sulfates discussed in lines 26-35 could be construed as an "example," they are not an example of observations predicted by the greenhouse theory. Rather, they are an example of data the greenhouse theory did not originally consider, but that when considered eliminate a potential weakness in the theory's predictions.
Answer Choice (B): The purpose of the discussion of sulfates is not to argue for the need for a new theory. Rather, the sulfate discussion shows that an already-existing theory (greenhouse effect theory) does not necessarily need to be rejected.
Answer Choice (C): This answer choice fails for at least two reasons. There is nothing in the passage (at least up until the lines 26-35 discussion) to support the idea that greenhouse effect theory was a "previously accepted theory." In fact, it was described as "controversial" in the first paragraph. The more complex reason that answer choice C fails is that the discussion of sulfates is not something the author uses to demonstrate the failures of greenhouse theory ("the degree to which [it] . . . fails"). Rather, sulfates are discussed as a way to rescue greenhouse theory from certain objections.
Answer Choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. The answer choice fits our prephrase, by asserting that the discussion is about how a weakness can be overcome (i.e. "show that a certain theory . . . can be defended") by considering additional data ("in light of additional data").
Answer Choice (E): The discussion of sulfates is not intended to resolve a debate between two competing theories (after all, only one theory is on the table), but rather to respond to an objection to a single theory.
