Question

Difficulty: HardInferences and Implicit Meaning

In 1864, Scottish polymath James Croll proposed that glacial epochs were triggered by periodic variations in Earth’s orbital eccentricity, which altered the distribution of solar radiation. Unlike earlier qualitative hypotheses that attributed glaciation solely to shifting ocean currents or topographic shifts, Croll attempted a rigorous quantitative mechanism, calculating how eccentricity-driven winters in aphelion would amplify albedo feedbacks through ice accumulation. However, Croll’s model predicted that glacial periods should alternate asynchronously between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres and that the most recent glacial epoch ended roughly 80,000 years ago. While nineteenth-century geologists initially welcomed Croll’s physical framework for establishing an absolute geological chronology, stratigraphers studying post-glacial erosion rates and Niagara Falls recession soon argued that the last ice sheet retreated far more recently—likely between 10,000 and 15,000 years ago. Furthermore, field evidence from transatlantic fossil floras suggested synchronous interhemispheric cooling rather than hemispheric alternation. Consequently, despite Croll’s pioneering integration of celestial mechanics with terrestrial feedback loops, late-nineteenth-century consensus sidelined his timeline, preferring empirical stratigraphic estimates until Milutin Milankovitch later refined the orbital parameters in the 1920s.

Consider each of the three choices separately and select all that apply.

Which of the following can be inferred from the passage regarding nineteenth-century geologists’ reaction to Croll’s theory?

  1. Their initial reception of Croll's model was influenced by the prospect of acquiring an absolute chronological standard for geological history.Answer
  2. B
    They ultimately rejected Croll's model because they disputed the general principle that astronomical forces could alter Earth's climate.
  3. Their physical evidence regarding the timing of the most recent glacial retreat differed significantly from the timeframe derived from Croll's calculations.Answer

Answer

The statement regarding initial interest in an absolute geological chronology and the statement regarding the discrepancy between empirical evidence and Croll's calculated timeline are both supported by the text.
The passage explicitly states that geologists initially welcomed Croll's framework because it offered an absolute geological chronology, supporting the inference regarding their initial motivation. Additionally, the passage contrasts Croll's calculated 80,000-year mark with stratigraphers' empirical finding of 10,000–15,000 years, directly supporting the inference that physical evidence contradicted his calculated timeframe.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the passage statement about the initial reception of Croll's work.
The text explicitly states geologists welcomed his framework 'for establishing an absolute geological chronology.'
This confirms that the possibility of having a quantitative timeline was an appealing factor in their initial reception.
2
Evaluate the reason for the eventual rejection of Croll's model.
Rejection stemmed from conflicting empirical data (retreat 10,000–15,000 years ago vs. Croll's 80,000 years, and synchronous vs. asynchronous cooling).
There is no indication that geologists doubted astronomical influence in principle; rather, Croll's specific timeline and interhemispheric predictions failed empirical tests.
3
Compare stratigraphers' timing evidence with Croll's model output.
Stratigraphers estimated retreat at 10,000 to 15,000 years ago, contrasting sharply with Croll's calculated 80,000 years.
This direct quantitative disagreement validates the inference that empirical evidence contradicted Croll's theoretical timeframe.

Key Concept

Inferences and Implicit Meaning in Reading Comprehension
Estimated Time:2m 30s
Rate this question