Ecologists, Scottish Highlands--Boldface

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 193
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:53 am
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:5 members

Ecologists, Scottish Highlands--Boldface

by amysky_0205 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:10 am
Ecologists: the Scottish Highlands were once the site of extensive forests, but these forests have mostly disappeared and been replaced by peat bogs. The common view is that the Highland's deforestation was caused by human activity, especially agriculture. However, agriculture began in the Highlands less than 2,000 years ago. Peat bogs, which consist of compressed decayed vegetable matter, build up by only about one foot per 1000 years, and, throughout the Highlands, remains of trees in peat bogs are almost all at depth great than four feet. Since climate changes that occurred between 7,000 years and 4,000 years ago favored the development of peat bogs rather than the survival of forests, the deforestation was more likely the result of natural processes than of human activity.

In the ecologist's argument, the two portions in boldfaces play which of the following roles?

A. The first is evidence that has been used in support of a position that the argument rejects; the second is a finding that the ecologist uses to counter the evidence.
B. The first is evidence that, in light of the evidence provided in the second, serves as grounds for the ecologist's rejection of a certain position
C. The first is a position that the ecologist rejects; the second is evidence that has been used in support of that position.
D. The first is a position that the ecologist rejects; the second provides evidence in support of that rejection.
E. The first is a position for which the ecologist argues; the second provides evidence to support that position.


OA: B

can someone explain this?
thank u so much!
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 447
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:13 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:700

by hemant_rajput » Thu Jan 31, 2013 4:04 am
"However" in first bold sentence suggest that a rejection coming for the common view.

now second bold sentence provide a fact which is corroborated by the first bold sentence.

Option B is stating the above conclusion. Also if you want to make your choice more easy you can eliminate with the relationship between First and Second bold sentence.
I'm no expert, just trying to work on my skills. If I've made any mistakes please bear with me.