61 LR One Question 14
- « 61 LR One Question 13
- 1961 of 3815
- 61 LR One Question 15 »
Comments

D. uses "only" and "could not"...Are these main indicators of it being stronger than C? (I've seen your video of those words used as indicators of wrong answers generally on weaken, strengthen questions) The passage says that the marks were made 1/2 billion years earlier than the known multicellular organisms. Wouldn't "early life forms other than worms" be weak because it doesn't describe exactly when in time these worms existed? ...Which leaves room for doubt. So, D is stronger than C because it destroyes the conclusion altogether...Leaving geogolical process as being incapaple of replacing the worm possibility. In this case the flaw is that the author didn't strengthen his bet on geo process, only that he weakened the assumption of worms being the cause.

Doesn't AC E strengthen the case for worms? It seems like on weaken they usually don't give us a straight up reason for why there causal argument does not work but give us why the alternative may work and AC E seems to sounds like that. Where did I go wrong?

We know that the marks are a half-billion years older than any life we know about. Learning that worms are among the earliest life forms doesn't change the time gap; we'd need some indication that they were not just earliest, but hundreds of millions of years earlier than the life we know about know.
Does that help?