Archaeologists in Michigan have excavated a Native American camp near Dumaw Creek. Radiocarbon dating of animal bones found at the site indicates that the camp dates from some time between 1605 and 1755. However, the camp probably dates to no later than 1630, since no European trade goods were found at the site, and European traders were active in the region from the 1620's onward.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
Due to trade among Native Americans, some European trade goods would have reached the area before the European traders themselves did.
At all camps in the region that have been reliably dated to the late 1620's, remains of European trade goods have been found.
The first European trade goods to reach the area would have been considered especially valuable and preserved as much as possible from loss or destruction.
The first European traders in the area followed soon after the first European explorers.
The site is that of a temporary camp that would have been used seasonally for a few years and then abandoned.
我觉得这道题的正确答案更应该长成这样子:“虽然from 1620年 onward,欧洲贸易商在这里就已经很活跃了,但是他们的货物由于运输晚了不到10年才到。”
这样的话,就能很好的explain这个逻辑缺陷,因为从1620年开始活跃,没有找到货物佐证的应该是这个camp应该是1620年前的,而不是no later than 1630,只有这样的一个explaination,才能解释这种逻辑上的跳跃。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论