Hi All,
First of all don't get distracted by "evidence that" in option C as I feel that has been placed as a distraction. Gmat generally test the knowledge of "evidence that" vs "evidence of", However this question does not test that concept primarily since this question is more meaning oriented. If you have any doubts regarding the "evidence that" vs "evidence of" concept, you can find a very crisp article by
egmat in the following link :
evidence-of-versus-evidence-that-171574.htmlAnyway, coming back to the original question, I will suggest using the
egmat 's 3 step approach and solving the question:
Meaning analysis: I have broken down the sentence and I suggest you pause after each line.
A recent study of ancient clay deposits has provided new evidence
supporting the theory
--> supporting modifies the evidence of global forest fires
ignited by a meteorite impact-- > The phrase in green color is providing more information about the fires
that contributed to the extinction of the dinosaurs and many other creatures some 65 million years ago. -- >
contributed is supposed to modify forest firesError Analysis:
1. "Theory of" --> this is incorrect since global forest fire is not the name of the theory. What we intend to do is actually state the theory
2. " theory of global forest fires that contributed" -- "That" doesnt clearly refers to "fires" and makes the reader believe that the theory contributed to the extinction.
Answers analysis:
(A) supporting the theory of global forest fires ignited by a meteorite impact that --> Explained in the error analysis
(B) supporting the theory that global forest fires ignited by a meteorite impact -- > clearly addresses all the mistakes in the original question
(C) that supports the theory of global forest fires that were ignited by a meteorite impact and that --> "theory of" is incorrect as explained in the error analysis
(D) in support of the theory that global forest fires were ignited by a meteorite impact and that --> Here there the second "that" again refers to the theory and incorrectly implies that the theory contributed to extinction
(E) of support for the theory of a meteorite impact that ignited global forest fires and--> There are more than one problems in this statement but " theory of" is good enough to strike this off