Hi, yes! This is a Bizarro Paradox question, which means that four of the answer choices would help to explain a discrepancy presented in the stimulus, and the fifth answer choice - here, the correct answer - would not help to explain that discrepancy.
Let's first look at the stimulus carefully.
The stimulus here presents you with certain facts (no argument). On their face, these facts seem contradictory. On the one hand you are told that the insect record indicates that a warm climate developed immediately after the melting of the glacier. But on the other hand you are also told that the pollen record indicates that the warm climate did not develop until a long time later.
Let's now examine each of the answer choices. (A) - If this statement is true, it would help to explain the apparent discrepancy, because it would indicate that we are possibly misinterpreting the insect record, by confusing cold weather beetle fossils (i.e., beetles that would have persisted with the glacier intact) for warm weather beetle fossils (i.e., beetles that would have indicated that the glacier had already melted).
(B) - If this statement is true, it would also help to explain the apparent discrepancy, by explaining why the insect record might be different from the pollen record (plants are slower to establish themselves than insects, post-glacier).
(C) - If this statement is true, it would help to explain the apparent discrepancy, by permitting the possibility that the beetles survived without plants for a while, by scavenging.
(D) - If this statement is true, it would also help to explain the apparent discrepancy, by explaining that the pollen record might have gaps, and that the explanation for such gaps is not necessarily an absence of a new climate.
(E) - This statement, however, has no bearing whatsoever on the apparent discrepancy set forth in the stimulus. Even if it is true that beetles are among the oldest insect species, how does that help us understand the apparently divergent facts that the insect record says one thing and the pollen record says another thing *about the timing of the disappearance of this glacier*? It just does not!
Hope this is helpful! Please let us know if you have any additional questions.
Ashley-TienJuly 10, 2018
I was stuck between A and E, but chose E; I thought E was correct because if beetles are older than many warm climate plants that the record for beetles after the glacier would show up first since the species of plants have not come into existence yet
ChristopherJuly 30, 2018
@Ashley-Tien, in the first sentence the question says that by dating pollen and beetle fossils, which returned after an Ice Age glacier melted in a particular area, it is possible to arrive at a rough time when warm weather returned. This sets up the basic assumption that both plants which produce such pollen and the beetles in question existed concurrently during the time period in question, and saying that beetles are older doesn't provide any additional information about the timing of the disappearance of the glacier, so it cannot be the right answer.
Samantha-AlexisMay 21, 2019
I cut it down to answer choice C and E. I ended up choosing C because I thought it didn't explain anything about pants, so even if beetles were able to survive, we don't know if plants were able to. And I thought answer E might resolve the paradox because maybe the beetles survived the first ice age, whereas the warmer plants didn't come till way after. So, I am not sure how I can prevent this mistake in the future on other questions.
