Through POE I narrowed the choices down to A and E. They both seem supported to me. For A, lines 23-25 say that the climate of the Amazon basin has fluctuated significantly.
For choice B, in lines 24-33, the passage goes on to discuss the different species of birds that Haffer noted inhabiting different parts of the basin, and the question that ended up puzzling scientists (lines 31-33).
I can see how E is more directly supported, but am I missing something in choice A?
LSAT Forum
4 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- cyruswhittaker
-
Thanks Received: 107
- Forum Guests
- Posts: 246
- Joined: August 11th, 2010
- Most Thanked
- First Responder
-
- ManhattanPrepLSAT1
-
Thanks Received: 1909
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 2851
- Joined: October 07th, 2009
Re: PT11, S3, Q20, - The passage suggests that
Tricky, tricky LSAT writer!
(A) is wrong because the passage discusses the "ice-age", creating "near desert-like conditions in the low-lands." That is not "winters" and "glaciation." Although in our heads it's very easy to connect winters and glaciation with ice-ages. They just sound the same, but they're not.
Does that help?
(A) is wrong because the passage discusses the "ice-age", creating "near desert-like conditions in the low-lands." That is not "winters" and "glaciation." Although in our heads it's very easy to connect winters and glaciation with ice-ages. They just sound the same, but they're not.
Does that help?
-
- tzyc
-
Thanks Received: 0
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 323
- Joined: May 27th, 2012
- Most Thankful
Re: Q20
I'm confused...
Isn't the question asking what Sander's hypothesis is? (Instead of Haffer's)
Also was not sure at first because The first sentence of 1st paragraph says "The old belief that climatic stability accounts for the high level of species diversity in the Amazon River basin of S.A. emerged...from observations of the deep sea".
So I thought Sanders did not fail to explain the diversity.
Maybe the last sentece of the 2nd paragraph starts from "Why would different..." touch the suspicious part but not sure...
Could anyone explain this plz?
Thank you
Isn't the question asking what Sander's hypothesis is? (Instead of Haffer's)
Also was not sure at first because The first sentence of 1st paragraph says "The old belief that climatic stability accounts for the high level of species diversity in the Amazon River basin of S.A. emerged...from observations of the deep sea".
So I thought Sanders did not fail to explain the diversity.
Maybe the last sentece of the 2nd paragraph starts from "Why would different..." touch the suspicious part but not sure...
Could anyone explain this plz?
Thank you
-
- ManhattanPrepLSAT1
-
Thanks Received: 1909
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 2851
- Joined: October 07th, 2009
- This post thanked 1 time.
Re: Q20
Lets walk through this one the whole way...
We're asked to find something the passage suggests is true of Sanders' hypothesis. Sanders' hypothesis was that the high rates of speciation in the tropics could be accounted for by climatic stability.
Answer choice (E) is supported by lines 21-24 and lines 29-33. These suggest that while Sanders' hypothesis explained the high rates of speciation, his hypothesis failed to account for the distribution of species in the rain forests.
Incorrect Answers
(A) is unsupported. The lack of winter and glaciation is not contested. During ice-ages it is supposed that the lowlands became arid places, but that is not the same as failing to account for winters and glaciation.
(B) is unsupported. The distinction was focussed on by other biologists, but that doesn't mean that Sanders failed to recognize the similarity between the two areas. And what about the differences! Aren't there differences that explain the distribution of species?
(C) is unsupported. Distribution of species was discussed as a result of the ice ages, but not extinction rates.
(D) is similar to answer choice (C). It's not that species became extinct and Sanders failed to notice, but rather that species bagan to take certain geographic distributions because of the ice ages, and this is something Sanders' hypothesis failed to explain.
We're asked to find something the passage suggests is true of Sanders' hypothesis. Sanders' hypothesis was that the high rates of speciation in the tropics could be accounted for by climatic stability.
Answer choice (E) is supported by lines 21-24 and lines 29-33. These suggest that while Sanders' hypothesis explained the high rates of speciation, his hypothesis failed to account for the distribution of species in the rain forests.
Incorrect Answers
(A) is unsupported. The lack of winter and glaciation is not contested. During ice-ages it is supposed that the lowlands became arid places, but that is not the same as failing to account for winters and glaciation.
(B) is unsupported. The distinction was focussed on by other biologists, but that doesn't mean that Sanders failed to recognize the similarity between the two areas. And what about the differences! Aren't there differences that explain the distribution of species?
(C) is unsupported. Distribution of species was discussed as a result of the ice ages, but not extinction rates.
(D) is similar to answer choice (C). It's not that species became extinct and Sanders failed to notice, but rather that species bagan to take certain geographic distributions because of the ice ages, and this is something Sanders' hypothesis failed to explain.
4 posts Page 1 of 1