Calvaria Major and the Dodo

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Narrow4% picked this

   Calvaria major germination, though rare, is probably adequate to avoid extinction

   This is ripped from the 2nd to last sentence of the passage, so, yes, this is a true claim, but it's not the main point. Remember that guy Temple, who we talked about in all 4 paragraphs? He needs to make an appearance in the main point answer (or at least his theory that "dodo bird extinction imperils Calvaria major" needs to show up).

   4%
2. B

   Correct80% picked this

   The appeal of Temple's hypothesis notwithstanding, the scarcity of Calvaria major is probably not due to the

   Why this is right

   This captures the author's position on Temple's hypothesis, which was the central topic of the passage. The goal of main point is to express our author's one-sentence takeaway about the central topic. The author thought that Temple "did offer some findings in support of his hypothesis which lent his argument a semblance of rigor", and she acknowledges that "many scientists found this dramatic and intriguing hypothesis plausible". But she ends the passage by presenting subsequent research that pokes huge holes in Temple's theory. - the trees are still germinating, even though the dodo has been gone for centuries - there are other ways to explain the declining numbers of Calvaria major trees.

   Skill tested: Main Point · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   80%
3. C

   Opposite7% picked this

   Temple's experimentation with Calvaria major pits, though methodologically unsound, nevertheless led to a probable solution to the mystery

   The main clause here is that "Temple's experimentation led to a probable solution to the mystery of the tree's decline". This is the opposite of (B), which says, "Temple's hypothesis is probably not the solution to the mystery of the tree's decline". The author wouldn't have ended the passage with strong challenges by leading specialists in the field, if she thought that Temple was probably correct.

   7%
4. D

   Opposite-ish6% picked this

   Temple's dramatic but speculative hypothesis, though presented without sufficient supporting research, may

   This is a slightly softer version of (C), since it says that "Temple's hypothesis may be correct", whereas (C) said it's probably correct. Our author certainly wouldn't say Temple's hypothesis is probably correct, but she might grudgingly acknowledge it's possibly correct, even though it would seem to be badly undermined by Strahm's and Speke's research. But the main point shouldn't be emphasizing the possibility of the theory being correct. Since the author lays out the theory and then ends the passage with a paragraph worth of push-back and counterevidence, the author wants to leave us with a skeptical feeling, not an optimistic / charitable feeling, towards Temple's hypothesis.

   6%
5. E

   Too Narrow Inference vs. Main Point4% picked this

   Calvaria major would probably still be scarce today even if the dodo had

   Since the author acknowledges that there has been a population decline when it comes to Calvaria major trees but doesn't think the Temple's argument is persuasive, about the dodo's extinction being the cause of that decline, our author would probably agree to the idea that "even if the dodo had not become extinct, Calvaria major trees would probably still be scarce today". This is sort of an anti-causal version of Flip the Causal Difference-Maker inferences. CAUSAL CLAIM: Sally was late because of the accident on the highway. SUPPORTABLE INFERENCE: Had there not been an accident, she would not have been late. ANTI-CAUSAL CLAIM: Sally's tardiness had nothing to do with the highway accident. SUPPORTABLE INFERENCE: Even if there hadn't been a highway accident, Sally still would have been tardy. So while the author would agree with this answer, that doesn't make it the main point of the passage, primarily because it leaves out Temple, who was a central figure in all four paragraphs.

   4%