PrepTest 113, Section 3, Question 12
Some biologists believe that the capacity for flight(77 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(17 more words not shown)
- AIt is cited(15 more words not shown)
- BIt is cited(15 more words not shown)
- CIt is cited(15 more words not shown)
- DIt weakens the(16 more words not shown)
- EIt corroborates the(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Scales don't point only to animals in the water. Even if feathers developed from scales, couldn't the scales have belonged to nonmarine reptiles?
That is the objection raised by the second group of biologists. The word 'rightly' tells us the author agrees with their rejection of the marine-origin suggestion. Their point about nonmarine reptiles gives another possible source for the scales, so the proposed connection doesn't single out marine reptiles.
I'm less convinced by their separate point about bats. The fact that bats now lack scales doesn't by itself settle where flight first developed. Perhaps an earlier ancestor lost scales, or perhaps bats developed flight later than some other group. Those are questions to investigate, not a history we've established from this passage.
The later discussion introduces a different comparison: tree-dwelling reptiles developing wings to help with leaps, versus land-dwelling reptiles' limbs developing into wings. We haven't been given enough to settle that debate either.
What we’re looking for
Fortunately, the question asks what the claim about nonmarine reptiles' scales does in the passage. It helps reject the initial marine-origin claim. We can identify that role without deciding which account of flight is actually right.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The claim is used against the suggestion that flight first developed in marine reptiles. If nonmarine reptiles also have scales, an asserted connection between scales and feathers doesn't point uniquely to marine reptiles. That makes the claim part of the evidence for rejecting the first proposal.
It isn't necessary to prove that nonmarine reptiles actually developed flight first. Showing why this piece of evidence fails to single out the marine group is enough to understand its role.
- B
The claim is aimed at the marine-origin account, not a claim about flight beginning in land-dwelling animals. In fact, noting that nonmarine reptiles have scales leaves a nonmarine source available. B assigns the evidence to the wrong side of the comparison.
- C
The tree-dwelling account appears later. The statement about scales is offered as part of the earlier objection to a marine origin. It isn't cited as a reason to reject a tree origin, and having scales doesn't itself rule that origin out.
- D
We aren't shown a conflict between nonmarine reptiles having scales and tree-dwelling reptiles developing flight first. The targeted claim concerns the marine group. D changes that target and attributes an effect on the later theory that the passage doesn't establish.
- E
The bat observation and the nonmarine-reptile observation are separate reasons offered against the marine account. Knowing that some reptiles have scales doesn't confirm that bats lack them or that bats fly.
Think of the support as two reasons pointing toward the same rejection. E instead makes one reason support the other. That is a different relationship from the one in the passage.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.