Some scientists believe that small humanoid skeletons found on an Indonesian island are the remains of human beings with a growth disorder.
Conclusion (more likely = opinion)
It’s more likely that these small humanoid skeletons represent a species of humans that became smaller over time due to environmental pressure (than it is that they are the remains of a human who had a growth disorder).
Evidence (X and Y)
The skeletons don’t fit the pattern of known growth disorders.
And there’s evidence that on this island that fox and mouse species were also smaller than normal (suggest that there were environmental pressures rewarding smaller bodies).
Evaluate
Before we read the argument for any Main Conclusion or Role question, we remind ourselves of the two main styles where they “hide” the conclusion on these questions:
- First Claim - Rebuttal / Pivot
Here we have an example of the 2nd style. The first claim isn’t our author’s opinion. In fact, it’s an attribution to some other point of view (some scientists believe). That would make us expect some sort of pivot into a rebuttal.
The 2nd sentence doesn’t use any pivot language, but it is the author rebutting the position in the first sentence. To clinch that this is indeed the conclusion, we need to feel that the author goes on to support the idea that these skeletons are “small species rather than growth disorder”.
The last two claims are, .
Goal
Once we’ve correctly found the conclusion, we’ve done the hard part. Now we just have to go find an answer that matches the meaning of the 2nd sentence.