#25 - Global Reference, Must Be True

[may35341]

I chose answer A because of the first paragraph talking about lizards. Is it wrong because it is just just briefly as an example?

I believe it's because lizards aren't mammals.

[Adam Tyson]

Indeed, lizards are not mammals, but in case anyone was wondering whether that would constitute outside information that we should not be expected to know, look at the structure of the second sentence of the passage:

"The dinosaur, lizard, and mammal fossils from this area... ."

This clearly indicates these are three different things, or categories of things. There are dinosaurs, but we don't know which kinds. There are also lizards, but we don't know what kinds. And there are mammals, but we don't know what kinds.

[CJ12345:]

Hi, powerscore,
it seems like your support for AC E coming from paragraph 3. However, I think the support is coming from the last paragraph in which it states "observations of modern sand dunes indicate that clay accumulates only if the dunes are stabilized by vegetation". Since we know that present-day there is no vegetation, the negation of it would be that there is no clay accumulation. If there is no clay accumulation, according to the previous sentences in the paragraph, we know that the heavy rains cannot cause wet sand to rush down a dune's face thus we could conclude present-day sand dunes are not subject to rain-caused sandslides. Please let me know if my reasoning is correct.

[Dana D]

Hey CJ,

I agree with the support for answer choice (E) coming from the third paragraph, although I believe it is saying that modern day dunes are sometimes subject to sudden rain-caused slides.

Some modern sand dunes have vegetation, some do not, but those with vegetation can have clay buildup, which inhibits rainwater drainage and leaves the dune susceptible to shifting sands during heavy rains. Not particularly critical to identifying the correct answer choice in this question, but just adding as a note for comprehension purposes.