Mavisdu1017 wrote:
rsama wrote:
A, B, C, and D all are irrelevant to conclusion made in argument. Thus POE confirms E.
Yes same here. But honestly I feel E is bullshit and nonsense, how does it strengthen the argument? Just seems to repeat the fossil...
Anybody can explain?
Hi,
I'll try to explain my logic-
The argument talks only about an ink-sac, that was 'probably' a squid's. The conclusion gives a generalisation that marine animals would have had ink sacs but nowhere does the argument 'confirm' that the ink-sac belonged to a marine animal.
Option E mentions that a squid's remains were also found around the same area and these remains appear to be from the Jurassic period. This further strengthens my belief that the ink-sac found was of the squid that is estimated to be from the J period so yes, I can conclude with more confidence that this ink sac phenom is at least 155 years old (from the J period).
Statistics : Posted by RenB • on 25 Jun 2022, 19:30 • Replies 3 • Views 3201







