Examkin

Question

Difficulty: EasyEvaluating the Impact of New Evidence

Triassic-Jurassic Extinction

Two scientists discuss the cause of the mass extinction at the end of the Triassic period:

*Scientist 1*
The extinction was caused by massive volcanic eruptions in the Central Atlantic Magmatic Province. These eruptions released immense amounts of carbon dioxide, leading to rapid global warming and acid rain, which devastated ecosystems.

*Scientist 2*
The extinction was caused by a large asteroid impact. The impact blasted dust and sulfur compounds into the atmosphere, blocking sunlight and causing a sudden, severe global cooling event that killed off most species.

Geologists recently analyzed sediment layers from the Triassic-Jurassic boundary and found high concentrations of volcanic ash and basalt fragments, but no evidence of shocked quartz or iridium (elements commonly associated with asteroid impacts).

Based on this new evidence, how are the scientists' viewpoints affected?

  1. A
    Scientist 1's viewpoint is weakened, while Scientist 2's viewpoint is supported.
  2. B
    Both Scientist 1's and Scientist 2's viewpoints are supported.
  3. Scientist 1's viewpoint is supported, while Scientist 2's viewpoint is weakened.Answer
  4. D
    Both Scientist 1's and Scientist 2's viewpoints are weakened.

Answer

Scientist 1's viewpoint is supported, while Scientist 2's viewpoint is weakened.
The correct option correctly states that Scientist 1's viewpoint is supported and Scientist 2's viewpoint is weakened. The sediment layer contains volcanic ash and basalt fragments, which directly align with Scientist 1's hypothesis of massive volcanic eruptions. Conversely, the absence of shocked quartz and iridium—elements that characteristically indicate an asteroid impact—weakens Scientist 2's hypothesis.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the key evidence needed for each scientist's hypothesis.
Scientist 1 requires volcanic evidence (ash, basalt). Scientist 2 requires impact evidence (iridium, shocked quartz).
To establish a baseline for evaluating the new geological findings.
2
Evaluate the new findings against Scientist 1's hypothesis.
The presence of volcanic ash and basalt fragments supports Scientist 1's volcanic hypothesis.
Direct observation of volcanic remnants matches the volcanic mechanism proposed by Scientist 1.
3
Evaluate the new findings against Scientist 2's hypothesis.
The absence of shocked quartz and iridium weakens Scientist 2's asteroid impact hypothesis.
An asteroid impact is expected to leave clear markers like shocked quartz and iridium, which are completely missing in the analyzed layers.

Key Concept

Evaluating the Impact of New Evidence
Estimated Time:45s
Rate this question

Topics

Evaluating the Impact of New Evidence

More questions from this topic