According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin，the wave of species extinctions that occurred in North America about 11,000 years ago，at the end of the Pleistocene era，can be directly attributed to the arrival of humans，i.e.，the Paleoindians， who were ancestors of modern Native Americans. However，anthropologist Shepard Krech points out that large animal species vanished even in areas where there is no evidence to demonstrate that Paleoindians hunted them.Nor were extinctions confined to large animals： small animals，plants，and insects disappeared，presumably not all through human consumption. Krech also contradicts Martin's exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene. Still，Krech attributes secondary if not primary responsibility for the extinctions to the Paleoindians，arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere.But，according to historian Richard White，even the attribution of secondary responsibility may not be supported by the evidence. White observes that Martin's thesis depends on coinciding dates for the arrival of humans and the decline of large animal species，and Krech，though aware that the dates are controversial，does not challenge them；yet recent archaeological discoveries are providing evidence that the date of human arrival was much earlier than 11,000 years ago. 　3. In the last sentence of the passage， the author refers to “recent archaeological discoveries” (lines 27-30) most probably in order to 　　(A) Refute White's suggestion that neither Martin nor Krech adequately account for Paleoindians' contributions to the Pleistocene extinctions 　　(B) Cast doubt on the possibility that a more definitive theory regarding the causes of the Pleistocene extinctions may be forthcoming 　　(C) Suggest that Martin's， Krech's， and White's theories regarding the Pleistocene extinctions are all open to question 　　(D) Call attention to the most controversial aspect of all the current theories regarding the Pleistocene extinctions 　　(E) Provide support for White's questioning of both Martin's and Krech's positions regarding the role of Paleoindians in the Pleistocene extinctions 老师，我在做这道题的时候，首先定位到最后一句觉得没说什么重点，就有个yet转折，可能这是用来驳斥前面的某些观点的。所以看选项找有没有驳斥的意思的， 发现5个选项全都在驳斥。。。心里慌了往前找。再回去找的时候时间已到。我就随便选了个B（时间一到各种混乱），因为在做这篇文章之前，我大体看了下原文，记住了原文讲的是P反驳M，W反驳P。后来答案我也看明白了，我认为我做这道题的思路出现了偏差，我想问一下应该怎么修正。

请问当遇到这种完全看不懂不明白逻辑关系的题怎么办？可以帮忙分析一下这篇文章吗

011我是把去银行放进了第一个、第二个、第三个然后分别去算它的可能性，我算出来是10种诶，不太懂为什么答案是12种

老师这个题我不知道为啥每个人扔硬币的组合是2^3...我觉得应该是2*3=6种。然后它里面说P扔硬币的结果没有和任何一个人相同有8*7*7种我也不是很明白。。?

041我没看懂答案，为什么条件2可以确定b一定是整数呀

请金老师帮忙回答下 七龙珠E卷 34 考点： 并列，时态 我自己选的A， 理由：划线外are often dragged under and drowned的 主语that指的就是seabirds， 语义，并列都符合，虽然用的是encountered但是感觉可以接受 给出的答案C，说长线 devastating 海鸟 are often dragged and drowned. 感觉从修饰结构能接受，但是句意不是很理解

请金老师帮忙回答，七龙珠E卷的 32题 考点： 修饰，分号与逗号 读完句子直间排除了BCD， 保留了A，E,做题时没有注意到分号， 是否因为it appears darker是有完整主谓，E不能直接逗号接从而排除

七龙珠E卷的16题 请金老师帮忙解答： 可以看出考点：修饰，指代，时态 根据副词修饰形容词排除了AB， CDE选项，我能看出考点，但是缺选不对答案，比如我知道考点是指代，但是我无法判断percentage of it这个加上到底好不好， 再比如我能注意到 estimated that, 会认为需要用将来式，但是做题的时候感觉读C更顺，而选择C 实际做题的时候，应该怎么结合看出来的考点提高正确率呢？

请问什么时候用从句，什么时候用svo+doing呢？

请问"and consequently"的意思和作用与“and thus" 或“and also"是一样的嘛

since Robert boyle是什么意思怎么感觉怪怪的？所以这道题就是关注语义形式并列而不是看功能并列嘛？还有就是and also到底可不可以用？