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.
果:欧洲商人1620年开始在这个区域非常活跃,但在营地这个地址没有发现欧洲商贸商品;
因:该营地历史截止不晚于1630年(营地在1630年之前某年就被团灭了);
(1)攻击结论:它因,营地1630年以后还在,但其他原因导致商品没被发现,挖的不够深?没有鉴别出来?(2)攻击前提:无关果,有没有发现欧洲商品和营地历史没有关系,可能该营地压根就不接受欧洲商品,不用它,就无法根据它来判断营地存在时间;
B项取非后,更符合攻击前提,说明无因果联系:所有可靠定位于17世纪20年代末的营地都没有发现欧洲商品残骸
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论