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。

请问这道题C选项and前后为什么可以是并列关系？

为什么选A？and之后的instead come是跟will avoid 并列嘛？还有就是 SVO+doing的形式到底能不能用？怎么用？

请问老师 画线部分这句话怎么没有谓语呢？我想了很久是省略了have been? 如果是这样的话，我发现省略的情况会影响我的阅读，可能是我对英文省略这块的语法不熟悉（什么时候可以省略，哪些可以省略等）老师能发我一些关于省略语法的资料我读读嘛，谢谢

从句不知道修饰谁的问题，有就近修饰的说法吗？怎么判断修饰谁呢：第一句 状语从句Where……打括号部分修饰museum还是Italy，说修饰Italy好像也翻译的通；第二句 that引导的从句 打括号部分修饰rationale还是social and political realities？在句中作什么成分呢; 第三句 that从句修饰evidence还是前面的Middle East？从句中的with和but怎么连在一起用呢

求问这个题，麻烦老师简明扼要解答一下 谢谢～

请问老师 如果是the Audubon society and other conversation groups发出的动作，为什么是concerned 不是concerning？画线部分是在句中是什么成分呢

DS. Is the integer n a multiple of 140? 1. N is multiple of 10. 2. N is mutual old of 14. @May老师 这到底在数学基础课里 请问题目里说integer 那么integer 也可以有负数 所以 E的答案 这样理解可以吗。