Critical Reasoning

Archaelogist: A skeleton of a North American mastadon that became extinct at the peak of the Ice Age was recently discovered.It contains a human-made projectile dissimilar to any found in that part of Eurasia closest to North America.Thus,since Eurasians did not settle in North America until shortly before the peak of the Ice Age,the first Eurasian settlers in North America probably came from a more distant part of Eurasia.

I cannot understand this argument at all.

P1:A skeleton of a North American mastadon that became extinct at the peak of the Ice Age was recently discovered

P2:It contains a human-made projectile dissimilar to any found in that part of Eurasia closest to North America. P1 says that it was a North American mastadon,now from P2 we learn that it contained a human projectile dissimilar to.......Eurasia closest to North America(What does Eurasia have to do with this statement,does it mean that the mastadon was found in this particular part of Eurasia,and nothing like this was earlier found in the same part of Eurasia closest to North America?)The stimulus doesnt say where the mastadon was found,it says North American mastadon,but in P2 the words in that area ,what does that refer to?My guess is the area where the mastadon was found that is Eurasia,but why the description-North American?



P3:Since Eurasians did not settle in North America until shortly before the peak of the Ice Age

Conclusion:The first Eurasian settlers in North America probably came from a more distant part of Eurasia.

I cant connect between the Premises and the Conclusion.

Premise 1: A skeleton of a North American mastodon that became extinct at the peak of the Ice Age was recently discovered.

Premise 2: The skeleton contains a human-made projectile dissimilar to any found in that part of Eurasia closest to North America.

Premise 3: Eurasians did not settle in North America until shortly before the peak of the Ice Age

Conclusion: the first Eurasian settlers in North America probably came from a more distant part of Eurasia.

I think the key here is the link between Premise 1 and Premise 3. The mastodon became extinct at the peak of the Ice Age, which was shortly after the first Eurasians arrived. Since the evidence in the skeleton shows that the projectile could not have come from the closest part of Eurasia, then the first settlers (the ones who made it to North America while the mastodon was still extant) could also not have come from the closest part of Eurasia. [/i]

P2:It contains a human-made projectile dissimilar to any found in that part of Eurasia closest to North America. P1 says that it was a North American mastadon,now from P2 we learn that it contained a human projectile dissimilar to.......Eurasia closest to North America(What does Eurasia have to do with this statement,does it mean that the mastadon was found in this particular part of Eurasia,and nothing like this was earlier found in the same part of Eurasia closest to North America?)The stimulus doesnt say where the mastadon was found,it says North American mastadon,but in P2 the words in that area ,what does that refer to?My guess is the area where the mastadon was found that is Eurasia,but why the description-North American?

The mastodon was found in North America. If not, it's going to be harder to explain how a mastodon from one continent made it across an ocean than it is to explain how the projectile found its way into a mastodon.

I think the issue you may be having is that it's not a very good argument. So the projectile didn't come from the closest part of Eurasia...so? Maybe it came from people already living in North America.