Q13

[tzyc]

Does the author say the how awful it is is unknown yet?
I think the author gives some examples...such as in the last paragraph.
Or is it because the question is asking "most likely" we do not have to have parfect match as LR?

Thank you

[rinagoldfield]

(C) is supported by several points in the last paragraph. The author states that "the consequences of [the biodiversity crisis] are the least predictable" because the value of the biodivesity "remains largely unstudied." This strongly implies that the biodiversity crisis will have negative effects, but the precise size and quality of those effects are unknown.
The stuff about "untapped wealth" at the end of the paragraph also supports (C). Biodiversity offers a range of unknown benefits to humans, so a lack of biodiversity signifies a range of unknown losses.
If you didn’t spot the support for (C) right away, the other answer choices are pretty eliminatable.

(A) is a comparison trap. We’re not comparing material and biological wealth.
(B) is extreme and out of scope. Hegemony of the human race? No.
(D) is also a comparison trap. The passage discusses some biological and human costs of the biodiversity crisis, but doesn’t compare them.
(E) is out of scope. The passage isn’t about the rate of extinctions.

[wgutx08]

C is also pretty much a paraphrase of paragraph 1, L6-8:

The ultimate consequences of this biological collision are beyond calculation, but they are certain to be harmful.

[jinkazamaa3]

Thank you for your explanation,
but I think it is for different passage...
Would like to read it in correct passage, so could you move it to the right place?
Thank you for the help.

[tommywallach]

Nope. This is the second passage of the reading comp section. It's correct...

-t

[Selims]

(C) is supported by several points in the last paragraph. The author states that "the consequences of [the biodiversity crisis] are the least predictable" because the value of the biodivesity "remains largely unstudied." This strongly implies that the biodiversity crisis will have negative effects, but the precise size and quality of those effects are unknown.
The stuff about "untapped wealth" at the end of the paragraph also supports (C). Biodiversity offers a range of unknown benefits to humans, so a lack of biodiversity signifies a range of unknown losses.
If you didn’t spot the support for (C) right away, the other answer choices are pretty eliminatable.

(A) is a comparison trap. We’re not comparing material and biological wealth.
(B) is extreme and out of scope. Hegemony of the human race? No.
(D) is also a comparison trap. The passage discusses some biological and human costs of the biodiversity crisis, but doesn’t compare them.
(E) is out of scope. The passage isn’t about the rate of extinctions.

Hi. I understand (C) can be supported by many statements in the passage. But my question is about (D) - can we really say the author "doesn't compare them" at all? In paragraph 4, the author mentions "unlike material and cultural wealth [...] biological wealth is usually taken for granted." So I reckoned the following sentences, elaborating on the "strategic[ally] error[ed-ness]" of such thought, is an illustration of "discuss[ing] the consequences of the crisis in terms of the potential loss to humanity." In sum, I thought (D) was an effective "author is most likely to agree" answer choice, inferring from the author's tone in paragraph 4.

Is this reading too much into it? Indeed, I do not dispute answer choice (C) over any of this discussion!

Thanks in advance.