section 1, module 2: reading and writing\nuntil recently, the earliest evidence for homo sapiens occupying…

section 1, module 2: reading and writing\nuntil recently, the earliest evidence for homo sapiens occupying tropical forests\ncame from asia and oceania and placed that occupation around 45,000 years ago,\nwhile the earliest evidence from africa showed occupation around 18,000 years\nago. h. sapiens emerged in africa around 300,000 years ago and could much more\neasily access tropical forests in africa than those in asia and oceania. tropical\nforests the world over present comparable preservation conditions, so in all\nlikelihood, this rather perplexing timeline simply reflected geographic differences\nin the extent of paleoanthropological research.\nwhich choice best describes the function of the underlined portion in\nwhole?\na it supports the texts conclusion by eliminating a potential\ncompeting explanation for the relatively late date of the earliest\nevidence of african tropical forest occupation by h. sapiens.\nb it acknowledges a limitation of the texts argument for why the\nearliest evidence of tropical forest occupation by h. sapiens is\nlater in africa than in asia and oceania.\nc it presents an observation that is crucial to the texts conclusion\nthat tropical forest occupation by h. sapiens occurred significantly\nlater in africa than in asia and oceania.\nd it bolsters the texts explanation for the geographic difference in\nthe earliest dates of tropical forest occupation by h. sapiens by\nshowing that tropical forests in africa have been less researched\nthan those in asia and oceania.

section 1, module 2: reading and writing\nuntil recently, the earliest evidence for homo sapiens occupying tropical forests\ncame from asia and oceania and placed that occupation around 45,000 years ago,\nwhile the earliest evidence from africa showed occupation around 18,000 years\nago. h. sapiens emerged in africa around 300,000 years ago and could much more\neasily access tropical forests in africa than those in asia and oceania. tropical\nforests the world over present comparable preservation conditions, so in all\nlikelihood, this rather perplexing timeline simply reflected geographic differences\nin the extent of paleoanthropological research.\nwhich choice best describes the function of the underlined portion in\nwhole?\na it supports the texts conclusion by eliminating a potential\ncompeting explanation for the relatively late date of the earliest\nevidence of african tropical forest occupation by h. sapiens.\nb it acknowledges a limitation of the texts argument for why the\nearliest evidence of tropical forest occupation by h. sapiens is\nlater in africa than in asia and oceania.\nc it presents an observation that is crucial to the texts conclusion\nthat tropical forest occupation by h. sapiens occurred significantly\nlater in africa than in asia and oceania.\nd it bolsters the texts explanation for the geographic difference in\nthe earliest dates of tropical forest occupation by h. sapiens by\nshowing that tropical forests in africa have been less researched\nthan those in asia and oceania.

Answer

Brief Explanations:

The text states that the earliest evidence of Homo sapiens in tropical forests was later in Africa than in Asia and Oceania. The underlined part about comparable preservation conditions eliminates the idea that preservation differences (a potential competing explanation) caused this. So it supports the conclusion by removing a competing reason.

Answer:

A. It supports the text's conclusion by eliminating a potential competing explanation for the relatively late date of the earliest evidence of African tropical forest occupation by H. sapiens.