- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:00 am
#22813
Complete Question Explanation
Weaken. The correct answer choice is (B)
This stimulus presents the “comet theory,” a hypothesis which, according to the author, plausibly explains the extinction of the dinosaurs. This is based on the fact that a collision with a sufficiently large comet could have created a dust cloud covering the planet and, in turn, lead to a cooling of the climate for long enough to kill off the dinosaurs. The argument is fairly straightforward, comprised of a conclusion based on a single premise, as follows:
Premise: A big enough collision could have led to a dust cloud covering the Earth, cooling the climate long enough to kill all of the dinosaurs.
Conclusion: The comet theory is a plausible explanation of the dinosaurs’ extinction.
The stimulus is followed by a Weaken question, so the correct answer choice, when added to the information presented in the stimulus, will hurt the author’s argument, and make the comet theory seem a less plausible explanation of the extinction of the dinosaurs.
Answer choice (A): The author of the stimulus does not make the claim that no other theories exist, but rather that the come theory merely provides a plausible explanation. As such, the fact that another school espouses a different theory would not weaken the author’s argument in this case.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. If, as this choice provides, around the time of the dinosaur extinction there were other animals that were physiologically similar to dinosaurs, and lived in similar habitats, one would expect that a global cooling sufficient to kill the dinosaurs would also be able to kill those physiologically similar animals. If such animals did not go extinct at the same time, this would support the notion that something else must have happened to kill off all of the dinosaurs. This is a "Cause, No Effect" form of attack.
Answer choice (C): This choice points to a lack of particular hard evidence to be found from dinosaur bones. A lack of evidence, however, does not disprove a theory, and would not weaken the author’s limited assertion that the comet theory, at the very least, provides a plausible explanation for the disappearance of the dinosaurs.
Answer choice (D): It should not be too surprising that some animals survived during the time that the dinosaurs went extinct. The author’s argument is that a comet could have created a dust cloud big enough to reduce the Earth’s temperature and kill all of the dinosaurs. But the author does not claim that such a cooling would have killed every species on the planet, so this choice does not weaken the author’s argument and should be removed from contention in response to this Weaken question.
Answer choice (E): This choice has no effect on the strength of the author’s argument. The consequences of a comet collision with Earth do not need to be fully understood in order for the author to conclude that the comet theory provides a plausible explanation of the disappearance of the dinosaurs.
Weaken. The correct answer choice is (B)
This stimulus presents the “comet theory,” a hypothesis which, according to the author, plausibly explains the extinction of the dinosaurs. This is based on the fact that a collision with a sufficiently large comet could have created a dust cloud covering the planet and, in turn, lead to a cooling of the climate for long enough to kill off the dinosaurs. The argument is fairly straightforward, comprised of a conclusion based on a single premise, as follows:
Premise: A big enough collision could have led to a dust cloud covering the Earth, cooling the climate long enough to kill all of the dinosaurs.
Conclusion: The comet theory is a plausible explanation of the dinosaurs’ extinction.
The stimulus is followed by a Weaken question, so the correct answer choice, when added to the information presented in the stimulus, will hurt the author’s argument, and make the comet theory seem a less plausible explanation of the extinction of the dinosaurs.
Answer choice (A): The author of the stimulus does not make the claim that no other theories exist, but rather that the come theory merely provides a plausible explanation. As such, the fact that another school espouses a different theory would not weaken the author’s argument in this case.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. If, as this choice provides, around the time of the dinosaur extinction there were other animals that were physiologically similar to dinosaurs, and lived in similar habitats, one would expect that a global cooling sufficient to kill the dinosaurs would also be able to kill those physiologically similar animals. If such animals did not go extinct at the same time, this would support the notion that something else must have happened to kill off all of the dinosaurs. This is a "Cause, No Effect" form of attack.
Answer choice (C): This choice points to a lack of particular hard evidence to be found from dinosaur bones. A lack of evidence, however, does not disprove a theory, and would not weaken the author’s limited assertion that the comet theory, at the very least, provides a plausible explanation for the disappearance of the dinosaurs.
Answer choice (D): It should not be too surprising that some animals survived during the time that the dinosaurs went extinct. The author’s argument is that a comet could have created a dust cloud big enough to reduce the Earth’s temperature and kill all of the dinosaurs. But the author does not claim that such a cooling would have killed every species on the planet, so this choice does not weaken the author’s argument and should be removed from contention in response to this Weaken question.
Answer choice (E): This choice has no effect on the strength of the author’s argument. The consequences of a comet collision with Earth do not need to be fully understood in order for the author to conclude that the comet theory provides a plausible explanation of the disappearance of the dinosaurs.
Effect