It has long been thought that lizards evolved from a group of amphibians called anthracosaurs, no fossils of which have been found in any rocks older than 300 million years. However, a fossil of a lizard was recently found that is estimated to be 340 million years old. Lizards could not have evolved from creatures that did not exist until after the first lizards. Therefore, lizards could not have evolved from anthracosaurs.
An assumption made in the argument is that there are noThe argument concludes that lizards could not have evolved from anthracosaurs because the earliest known lizard fossil is older than the oldest known anthracosaur fossils.
The key assumption is that the fossil record is not hiding older anthracosaurs. Otherwise, anthracosaurs may have existed before 340 million years ago even though their fossils have not yet been found.
(A) unknown anthracosaur fossils older than 340 million years
Correct. If there are unknown anthracosaur fossils older than 340 million years, then anthracosaurs may have existed before the 340-million-year-old lizard fossil. That would destroy the argument’s claim that anthracosaurs came too late.
(B) unknown lizard fossils older than 340 million years
Wrong. Older lizard fossils would make the problem even worse for the anthracosaur theory, but the argument does not need to assume that none exist.
(C) known lizard fossils that predate some anthracosaur fossils
Wrong. This is already compatible with the argument. The 340-million-year-old lizard fossil already predates the known anthracosaur fossils.
(D) known anthracosaur fossils that predate some lizard fossils
Wrong. Some anthracosaur fossils could predate some later lizard fossils without predating the first known lizard fossil.
(E) known lizard fossils whose age is uncertain
Wrong. The argument depends on the age relationship between the 340-million-year-old lizard fossil and anthracosaurs, not on whether some other lizard fossils have uncertain ages.
Answer: (A)