Examkin

Question

Difficulty: EasyArgument Analysis and Evaluating Claims

Until recently, paleontologists believed that the rapid decline of megafauna in prehistoric North America was caused exclusively by sudden climatic cooling. However, recent radiocarbon dating of fossilized remains demonstrates that several megafaunal species survived for thousands of years after the onset of the cooling period. Furthermore, early human settlement patterns closely match the progressive geographic disappearance of these animals. Consequently, researchers now argue that human hunting was the primary catalyst for the megafauna's extinction. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the researchers' argument?

  1. Fossilized megafaunal remains from the period show virtually no butchery marks or weapon impact damage attributable to early humans.Answer
  2. B
    Researchers have established that human hunting was also responsible for the decline of several smaller mammal species during the same era.
  3. C
    Several megafaunal species in regions without human presence also underwent extinction during earlier geological epochs.
  4. D
    Early human settlements relied primarily on flint and obsidian to craft their hunting tools.
  5. E
    The onset of climatic cooling was preceded by a long period of stable weather conditions across North America.

Answer

The argument is most weakened by the finding that fossilized megafaunal remains show virtually no butchery marks or weapon impact damage attributable to early humans.
The correct answer provides direct physical evidence that contradicts the hunting hypothesis. If fossilized remains show no physical signs of butchering or stone tool damage, it strongly suggests humans were not hunting these animals in significant numbers, thereby undermining the conclusion that human hunting drove them to extinction.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion and underlying evidence of the argument.
The conclusion is that human hunting was the primary catalyst for megafaunal extinction, based on the evidence that human settlement patterns geographically coincided with the disappearance of megafauna after climate cooling began.
To weaken an argument, one must pinpoint the connection between the premise (geographic overlap) and conclusion (causal hunting).
2
Determine what information would break or severely undermine the causal claim of human hunting.
Direct physical evidence showing an absence of hunting activities on megafauna bones would demonstrate that co-location did not equal active hunting.
If humans were not actually butchering or killing these animals, hunting could not be the primary catalyst.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to locate the statement providing this counter-evidence.
The statement noting an absence of butchery or weapon marks on fossilized bones directly refutes the claim of hunting activity.
This provides empirical proof against the hunting hypothesis.

Key Concept

Evaluating argument strength by finding evidence that directly contradicts a causal claim
Estimated Time:1m 0s
Rate this question

Topics

Argument Analysis and Evaluating Claims

More questions from this topic