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。

请问郭老师 这是这次的寂静 请帮我分析一下下 如果问的是主旨 这主旨是啥？

请数学老师讲解思路 答案为1/30 谢谢老师

Although fruit can no longer grow once it is picked, it continues for some time to respire, taking in oxygen and giving off carbon dioxide, similar to the way human beings breathe. A similar to the way human beings breathe. B similarly to human beings who are breathing. C just like the breathing of human beings. D as human beings when breathing E just as human beings do when they breathe 老师，我在网上看到如下的答疑，similar to /like 只能就近修饰前面的n，所以ABC错误，这句话我不太理解，是说similar to和like在这里是修饰respire的吗？ 此外，还有个地方不理解，（like后面是不是应该+句子，similar to 后面+n ）才能表示比较呢？

请英吉老师回答~谢谢! 请老师看第五题，我当时看到C时是很想选C的，但是看完E后觉得E更直接，E说一些找不到停车位的车会在城里晃来晃去当等待游客时。我觉得原文建造停车场就能减少这个情况，挺像阐述逻辑链条的对立面的，请问我应该要怎样的的思路才能排除E呢？！谢谢~

请数学老师解答 勾股定理我已经忘的差不多了 这题怎么判断

请郭老师解答 另外b为什么是错的

请王文静老师回答，谢谢！这题我是这样下手的，AC分一组，强调advocate这个动作; BDE分一组重点倾向去修饰reformers这些人，所以我哦才留了BD. 请问老师这样想对吗？你在直播课里说advocate后面跟名词，我觉得这个算是比较细的语法点，请问advocate后加名词这个语法点是不会错的么？谢谢~

请王文静老师回答～谢谢！ 这题我不知道从何下手，感觉题目是说把用油的车换成用天然气的。所以，觉得前面应该要有“用油”这个表达和未划线部分的run on clearner-burning natural gas对应，所以我觉得BE比较对应。但答案是A..麻烦老师解答一下下手点！

思路： 能排除ACD，留下BE。 我一开始选了B因为觉得语义最通顺：本地猫起源于非洲野猫 4000年之前，which一个前所未有的短时间给本地猫进化以及 （4000年）是足够的为身体变化。 E 后面用的是一个同位语 divergence 指代主干的事情 这点我能接受 这个one 指的是谁啊？ 我一开始以为指的是时间 然后看Ron说 指代的是divergence 我就不能理解了。 网上搜到的解释给的答案是E。求老师讲解BE。 谢谢

19年OG这题貌似还没录入你们系统。 想问老师排除了ABC,当时在DE之间徘徊。。。后来选错了，但是D怎么不如E呢?