Some prehistoric pots made by the Woodland people have patterned markings that indicate the pot was formed using the paddling method. These patterned markings result only from this particular method. Thus archaeologists' recent discovery of similar patterned markings on the pots made by the Mill Creek people suggests that the Mill Creek people used the paddling method, not just the coiling method.
In the passage, the author develops the argument by
A. generating an explanation that apparently resolves discrepancies among several pieces of evidence
B. reformulating an earlier theory that had been used explain similar evidence
C. using an analogy with an understood archaeological feature to draw a conclusion about a newly discovered feature
D. theorizing about how pottery from one culture might have been influenced by interaction with another culture
E. identifying the effects that different societal circumstances had on pottery-making

source - ready4gmat
_________________

Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Want to improve your Score:
GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases

yes i think C is the answer because of following reasons:-
A. i didn't find several pieces of evidence.
B. nothing is reformulating its just explaining precious thing and use same method
c. yes it an analogy
D.nothing is influencing anything.
E.its not identifying different societal circumstances. its just giving explanation for some precious one and now applying same methodology.

Some prehistoric pots made by the Woodland people have patterned markings that indicate the pot was formed using the paddling method. These patterned markings result only from this particular method. Thus archaeologists' recent discovery of similar patterned markings on the pots made by the Mill Creek people suggests that the Mill Creek people used the paddling method, not just the coiling method.
In the passage, the author develops the argument by
A. generating an explanation that apparently resolves discrepancies among several pieces of evidence - There are no discrepancies in the argument drawn.
B. reformulating an earlier theory that had been used explain similar evidence - The theory is clear that woodland people are using the paddling method and they have observed the similar markings.
C. using an analogy with an understood archaeological feature to draw a conclusion about a newly discovered feature - Correct, this is what exactly is mentioned in the Stimulus of the argument.
D. theorizing about how pottery from one culture might have been influenced by interaction with another culture - They have presented an argument, there is no theory about how pottery influence from one culture to another.
E. identifying the effects that different societal circumstances had on pottery-making - Wrong, they have presented an observation, there are no social circumstances drwan in the argument.

Hope it is clear