PrepTest 52, Section 2, Question 13

Difficulty:

Some paleontologists believe that certain species of dinosaurs guarded their young in protective nests long after the young hatched. As evidence, they cite the discovery of fossilized hadrosaur babies and adolescents in carefully designed nests. But similar nests for hatchlings and adolescents are constructed by modern crocodiles, even though crocodiles guard their young only for a very brief time after they hatch. Hence, _______.

Question

Which one of the following most logically completes the argument?

paleontologists who believe that hadrosaurs guarded their young long after the young hatched have no evidence to support this belief

we will never be able to know the extent to which hadrosaurs guarded their young

hadrosaurs guarded their young for at most very brief periods after hatching

it is unclear whether what we learn about hadrosaurs from their fossilized remains tells us anything about other dinosaurs

the construction of nests for hatchlings and adolescents is not strong evidence for the paleontologists' belief

Raise Hand ✋

Explanations

Dinosaur nests

This is a fill-in-the-blank question. We need an answer choice that takes our unfinished argument and makes it whole.

The author tells us that some paleontologists think some species of dinosaurs kept their young in protective nests beyond their hatchling years, citing hadrosaur nests, specifically. But then the author introduces some countervailing evidence that modern crocodiles build similar nests to hadrosaurs but don't protect their young.

So what would finish this argument? I'm predicting something like, "Therefore, the nests aren't great evidence for the paleontologists' hypothesis."

Let's see.

Nah, the author wouldn't argue the paleontologists have no evidence, just that the evidence they lean on isn't great support for their claims.

No again. The author wouldn't go so far as to say this issue is impossible to understand given the crocodile-hadrosaur nesting discrepancies.

Nah, this is a trap. If the author made this conclusion, they'd be making a flawed argument, so this can't be the most logical way to complete their argument.

Nope. This is probably true, but wouldn't sensibly complete this argument. That is, what we learn from hadrosaurs doesn't necessarily tell us anything about other dinosaurs, but ask yourself: is that the point this author's trying to make? Not at all. They're trying to cast aspersions on the hypothesis of some paleontologists, not make other claims about what we can learn about other dinosaurs from hadrosaur nests.

Finally, yes. And right in line with our prediction. Because of what we know about crocodile nesting and child-rearing, the hadrosaur nests provide weak support for the paleontologists' hypothesis, at best. This is the answer.