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。

想请问下May老师，这道题怎么做出答案C？

请陆老师回答一下这一题为什么选B。我选了E。

请陆老师回答一下。这一题我错选了B。取yes，就是收入来自于commuter的是有季节性波动的。意思不就是旅游旺季，人多拥挤，commuter就会到港口来坐ferry，旅游淡季，人少，commuter就还是toll road不会来港口，支持原文；取no，就是没有季节性波动，说明无论是旅游旺季还是淡季，拥不拥挤，搭乘不搭乘ferry都不会影响commuter来不来这里吃饭，驳斥原文。 而C选项说的是港口吸不吸引tourist，但是原文argument说的是通过将commuter直接带到港口来增加收入，这和tourist有什么关系呢？感谢老师解答。

请陆老师回答一下。这一题我选了A，为什么正确答案是E。我首先判断第一句话是pre-evidence，第二句话是counter argument，第三句话的黑体字是conclusion，后半句是premise。 我觉得因为第一个黑体字是“all automobile dealers…”也是属于数据的，第二句话反驳了critics的观点。所以选了A。

请慧雯老师回答一下这一题为什么选C，A选项中as也有因为的意思 ，麻烦您分析一下其他选项。感谢解答！

请慧雯老师回答一下这一题为什么选B，我选了D。为什么需要用完成时态和被动形式以及为啥要加一个since呢？感谢解答！

请张慧雯老师回答一下这篇阅读的两题。 第一题，我定位到第二段（因为整个就是the first explanation”）。但是后面看到选项BCD好像还要定位到第四段“in 1840, about… was rough the same”这两个地方。但是我不知道精准定位是在哪里。然后还是不太懂这篇文章的意思，以及这一题为什么选C。 第二题，看到题干就觉得好难定位，通篇好像都要读，没办法快速根据题干来定位，结果还错选了A。请老师解答一下这一题的突破点以及为啥选D。

请王文静老师回答一下。请问一下这一题为什么选B。我选了E是因为前面说科学家猜测黄蜂被这种气味所吸引，但是后面说in this study，只有grassy odors释放出来了，说明这种气味肯定与grassy odors这种气味不一样。而B说这种气味没有grassy scent，但是原文又说科学家猜测黄蜂是被an odor，reminiscent of cut grass，that is released as the catepillar feeds，意思不就是这种气味类似于cut grass吗？那为什么还会选B。

请张慧雯老师回答一下。这一题为什么不选D，形容词修饰的动词一般不是系动词吗？为啥这一题会选E。感谢回答！

请陆旭老师回答一下。图片中的这一题为什么不可以选C，我的理解是这个研究是30年前做的，所以不适用于当今的情况，不具备说服力。