confuse mind wrote:By dating fossils of pollen and beetles, which returned after an Ice Age glacier left an area, it is possible to establish an approximate date when a warmer climate developed. In one glacial area, it appears from the insect record that a warm climate developed immediately after the melting of the glacier. From the pollen record, however, it appears that the warm climate did not develop until long after the glacier disappeared.
Each one of the following, if true, helps to explain the apparent discrepancy EXCEPT: <--OK, or job is to find which one does NOT explain the discrepancy. The discrepancy is: Pollen and beetles return after an ice age. Yet, in one glacial area, we see an insect record before pollen record. So we must find an answer that does NOT give a reason for this. Maybe insects could come back before plants, or insects could survive in cold weather.... lets look at the answers

(A) Cold-weather beetle fossils can be mistaken for those of beetles that live in warm climates. This could explain the discrepancy.
(B) Warm-weather plants cannot establish themselves as quickly as can beetles in a new environment. This could explain the discrepancy. This stats that insects can come back to life before pants!
(C) Beetles can survive in a relatively barren postglacial area by scavenging. This could explain the discrepancy.
(D) Since planes spread unevenly in a new climate, researchers can mistake gaps in the pollen record as evidence of no new overall growth.This could explain the discrepancy.
(E) Beetles are among the oldest insect species and are much older than many warm-weather plants. This could NOT explain the discrepancy. If they are older it doesn't mean that they could show up earlier than the plants in this particular ice age.