Thanks for the question! We need to figure out what prediction the principles of the time theory would support, so we need to head to paragraph 2, where the time theory is discussed. The time theory tells us that diverse species adapted to today’s climactic conditions have had more time to emerge in the tropical regions because they weren’t affected by a succession of ice ages. The time theory, then, is telling us that the ice ages directly messed up the ability of the species to diversify. That suggests that if there were no ice ages in other places, the number of species elsewhere could also increase significantly, and this is what (A) tells us.
(C), on the other hand, is incorrect. (C) tells us that if there are no further ice ages, the climactic conditions at high latitudes might match those at tropical latitudes. However, the time theory doesn’t mention anything about the evolution of climactic conditions over time. It only tells us about how species diversify over time. You might have been tricked out by “…today’s climactic conditions have had more time to emerge in the tropical regions, which…have been unaffected by a succession of ice ages.†It’s important to read the entire sentence carefully, as well as the surrounding sentences! Hope this helps, and feel free to ask any other questions you might have.
