A natural history museum contains several displays of wild animals.
Statements
Causal (by)
Drying and mounting → displays of wild animal skins animals
Causal (because)
low humidity and → skins are deteriorating heat of lights
Comparison (older vs. newer)
Older Newer
lit by tungsten lit by compact fluorescent
same light given off
more heat less heat
Evaluate
We read Inference statements primarily looking for overlapping ideas, usually relating to Conditional / Causal / Comparative type language.
We talked about displays of animals skins and we talked about the different lamps used, and in both cases (haha, no pun intended), we talked about the heat given off by the lights.
When we were hearing about a Causal Difference-Maker, we learned that the heat given off by the lights was starting to cause the animals' skins to deteriorate.
In this Comparison, the old tungsten give off more heat than the new compact fluorescent.
So by applying what we learned from the Causal Difference-Maker, the old tungsten leads to more deterioration of the skins than does the new compact fluorescent.
Goal
It's tough to know exactly where this will go, but it seems like they would want us to prove we see the connection between different lamps giving off different amounts of heat and how heat from the light affects the deterioration of the animal skins.