| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sankruth
Really wants to Beat The GMAT!
Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 195
Thanks given: 11
Thanked 9 times in 9 posts
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 10:56 am Post subject: Swartkans |
 |
|
Answers with explanations please...
In Swartkans territory, archaeologists discovered charred bone fragments dating back 1 million years. Analysis of the fragments, which came from a variety of animals, showed that they had been heated to temperatures no higher than those produced in experimental campfires made from branches of white stinkwood, the most common tree around Swartkans.
Which of the following, if true, would, together with the information above, provide the best basis for the claim that the charred bone fragments are evidence of the use of fire by early hominids?
(A) The white stinkwood tree is used for building material by the present-day inhabitants of Swartkans.
(B) Forest fires can heat wood to a range of temperatures that occur in campfires.
(C) The bone fragments were fitted together by the archaeologists to form the complete skeletons of several animals.
(D) Apart from the Swartkans discovery, there is reliable evidence that early hominids used fire as many as 500 thousand years ago.
(E) The bone fragments were found in several distinct layers of limestone that contained primitive cutting tools known to have been used by early hominids. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
v_shiv
Just gettin' started!
Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Posts: 6
Thanks given: 0
Thanked 0 times in 0 posts
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 2:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I will go with E. The only thing that needs to be proved in the given statement is that the bones were not charred by the forest fire but by humans. And E supports this by proving that these animals were cut by the tools before being burnt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sankruth
Really wants to Beat The GMAT!
Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 195
Thanks given: 11
Thanked 9 times in 9 posts
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 3:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| v_shiv wrote: | | I will go with E. The only thing that needs to be proved in the given statement is that the bones were not charred by the forest fire but by humans. And E supports this by proving that these animals were cut by the tools before being burnt. |
Yes, I agree that the tools found near animal bones prove that the bones were perhaps broken by tools before they were charred. But it still does not prove conclusively that the bones were charred by by human created fires rather than by forest fires. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sujaysolanki
Really wants to Beat The GMAT!
Joined: 14 Nov 2007
Posts: 212
Thanks given: 0
Thanked 15 times in 15 posts
Target GMAT Score: 650+
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
