GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 28 May 2020, 12:41

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 10467
Location: Pune, India
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2017, 03:36
Prashant10692 wrote:
What is function of That in D? Could anyone explain the context.

Check this post on conjunctions: https://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2014/0 ... -the-gmat/

Also, a that-clause can function as a subject, object, complement, or appositive in a declarative sentence.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Manager
Joined: 23 Jun 2016
Posts: 91
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2017, 06:50
1
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
Prashant10692 wrote:
What is function of That in D? Could anyone explain the context.

Check this post on conjunctions: https://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2014/0 ... -the-gmat/

Also, a that-clause can function as a subject, object, complement, or appositive in a declarative sentence.

In D, is usage of “that” to introduce a clause is using it as “subordinating conjunction”?

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2993
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2017, 13:45
sevenplusplus wrote:

I felt that this usage of "that" with "there was" was awkward and therefore did not pick option D. I thought that only FANBOYS can connect two clauses.
Would you be able to share some examples, other OG questions where "that" is used to connect two clauses?

Hello sevenplusplus,

Thank you for the query.

Usage of the subordination conjunction that to connect two clauses is very common across the GMAT SC.

Following are just a few examples:

OG 16#9: In a review of 2,000 studies of human behavior that date back to the 1940s, two Swiss psychologists declared that since most of the studies had failed to control for variables such as social class and family size, none could be taken seriously.

OG 16#10 : A long-term study of some 1,000 physicians indicates that the more coffee these doctors drank, the greater was their likelihood of having coronary disease.

OG 16#32: The widely accepted big bang theory holds that the universe began in an explosive instant ten to twenty billion years ago and has been expanding ever since.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2993
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2017, 13:47
sevenplusplus wrote:
In D, is usage of “that” to introduce a clause is using it as “subordinating conjunction”?

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Hello sevenplusplus,

I will be glad to respond to this one.

Yes indeed. That's exactly the function of that in Choice D.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________
IIMA, IIMC School Moderator
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 1427
Location: India
WE: Engineering (Other)
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Mar 2018, 23:47
GMATNinja VeritasPrepKarishma sayantanc2k

Is there any better way to reach OA here than to know idioms?
_________________
It's the journey that brings us happiness not the destination.

Feeling stressed, you are not alone!!
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 10467
Location: Pune, India
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Mar 2018, 04:36
GMATNinja VeritasPrepKarishma sayantanc2k

Is there any better way to reach OA here than to know idioms?

Don't think of it as "knowing or not knowing idioms". It is about the meaning of the words "as" and "by".
"as" equates for example "as happy as", "as good as"...
"by" indicates an agency of getting something done... So you can "explain by ..."

I would understand if the idiom tested were say, "to and fro" vs say, "to and back". We use "to and fro" though fro means back. Nowadays, pure idiom testing is usually a smokescreen in GMAT.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 84
Location: India
Concentration: Social Entrepreneurship, Strategy
GMAT 1: 620 Q41 V34
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2018, 08:59
daagh

egmat

VeritasPrepKarishma

anairamitch1804

sayantanc2k

Why do we eliminate options B and E, as per my understanding we eliminate A and C because of "explained as" because "AS" equates things.

Quote:
"The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.
(A)  The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as
(B)  Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is
(C)  That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as
(D)  One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was
(E)  Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being "
Board of Directors
Status: Emory Goizueta Alum
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3587
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2018, 09:58
Why do we eliminate options B and E, as per my understanding we eliminate A and C because of "explained as" because "AS" equates things.

I am happy to help

You need to understand the construction of the sentences and make sure that sentences are well structured.

Now, let's talk about B and E.

Quote:
(B)  Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is

The blue highlighted line doesn't have a verb in it. So, it is no where a clause. Now, that means it is a phrase and is acting as a modifier.

Modifier + Comma rule says that the modifier MUST refer to the subject of the main clause after the comma.

Here the Subject is "One explanation". That means we are trying to say One explanation was a Thule artifacts being .. blah blah...

Hence, B is incorrect.

Quote:
(E)  Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being "

The usage of with is incorrect here. I think you should read this article: When to use with on GMAT.

Having said that "with one explanation" here means we are saying they are similar as well as they are with something else. This is wrong.

Does that make sense?
_________________
My LinkedIn abhimahna. | My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40 | My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place
GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More | Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here | Have OPT questions? - Post them here.
Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free
Check our new About Us Page here. |
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 1004
The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 07 May 2019, 12:04
5
2
Hello Everyone!

Let's take a closer look at this question, since it appears that the original posting had to be updated at some point to fix typos. We'll look at each option and narrow it down to the right answer. To get started, here is the question with any major differences between each option highlighted in orange:

The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as
(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is
(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as
(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was
(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being

Right away, if we just read the orange parts in each option, we start to see some problems:

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as

This answer is INCORRECT because it's saying that the similarity of Thule artifacts IS a rapid movement of people from one end of North American to another, which doesn't really make logical sense. It should say that the similarity is CAUSED BY a rapid movement of people. It's also not clear that this is only ONE explanation of many - it just says that this partly explains the similarity of artifacts.

(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is

This is INCORRECT because it's unclear what the subject of the sentence is. The phrase "Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region" needs a verb directly after it to work because it is acting like a subject here. "One explanation" is also acting as the subject. We can't have two subjects that are just stacked on top of each other like this, with nothing connecting them.

(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as

This is INCORRECT for the same reason as option A. If you read carefully, it says that the phenomenon of similar artifacts IS the movement of people, not that it was CAUSED BY a sudden movement of people. This doesn't make logical sense, so let's toss this option aside.

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was

This is CORRECT because it conveys the proper meaning (the movement of people is one explanation for finding similar artifacts in several places), and this is absolutely clear to readers. This isn't to say this option is perfectly grammatically correct - many of you took issue with the phrase "is that there was" being overly wordy. However, this is the best answer because it conveys its meaning the clearest - even if you could argue that you could cut a few words out.

(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being

This is INCORRECT because the first clause "Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar" is missing a comma after the word region.

There you have it - option D is the correct answer! This was a difficult question, for sure!

Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.
_________________
"Students study. GMAT assassins train."

The Course Used By GMAT Club Moderators To Earn 750+

souvik101990 Score: 760 Q50 V42 ★★★★★
ENGRTOMBA2018 Score: 750 Q49 V44 ★★★★★

Originally posted by EMPOWERgmatVerbal on 30 Jul 2018, 15:45.
Last edited by EMPOWERgmatVerbal on 07 May 2019, 12:04, edited 2 times in total.
Senior Manager
Status: eternal student
Joined: 06 Mar 2018
Posts: 324
Location: Kazakhstan
Concentration: Technology, General Management
Schools: Stanford
GPA: 3.87
The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 26 Jan 2019, 17:52

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was

Can sombody explain to me function of "there" here in option D.
"that" plays subordinating function and connects two clauses, clear.
But what about "there" is this a placeholder or refers to "vast region"?
_________________
My SC approach flowchart
My Verbal Flashcards

(no one is ideal, please correct if you see any mistakes or gaps in my explanation, it will be helpful for both of us, thank you)

___________________
"Nothing in this life is to be feared, it is only to be understood"
~ Marie Curie

Originally posted by GKomoku on 02 Jan 2019, 08:15.
Last edited by GKomoku on 26 Jan 2019, 17:52, edited 1 time in total.
Retired Moderator
Status: enjoying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 5560
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jan 2019, 06:21
2
Top Contributor
GK

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was

GK
Yes, it is used as a placeholder.

It is not a pronoun that can replace the noun vast regions since if you replace the word with 'vast region', you will see that the clause doesn't make any sense.
_________________
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can,
and above all the wisdom to know the difference.
-The Serenity Prayer - A GMAT aspirant’s first entreaty
Over 200 pages of personal course material on all gamuts of GMAT SC for non-native speakers, value for the money; 919884544509
Intern
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 1
The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jan 2019, 09:04
I rejected options with "one explanation" because the original sentence intends to say that 'a part of the reason is ...'. "One explanation" would mean that there are multiple potential explanations and one of them is.... Thoughts?
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 3848
The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jan 2019, 11:10
1
blockman wrote:
The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as

(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is

(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was

(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being

bharatmatta wrote:
I rejected options with "one explanation" because the original sentence intends to say that 'a part of the reason is ...'. "One explanation" would mean that there are multiple potential explanations and one of them is.... Thoughts?

Hi bharatmatta , option A does not determine the original or intended meaning of the sentence.

The answer that is grammatically correct, logically sound, and rhetorically effective contains the intended meaning.

Option A incorrectly equates a characteristic of an artifact with the geographical and historical movement of people through real space.
An characteristic, similarity, is not the same as an event, the movement of people through space and time.

Answer D is grammatically and logically correct. Its meaning is the intended one.

If I buy the premise that AN explanation is composed of internally consistent parts, then I agree:
"one explanation" [composed of internally consistent parts] does suggest multiple and inconsistent explanations, plural.
I also concede that if I buy your premise about what "explanation" means, a partial explanation and one explanation are not the same thing.

I am trying to remember an official question that tests with this much sophistication. I cannot remember one.

Now it is time for me to exit the Hall of Mirrors within whose walls stands the Tower of Babel populated by postmodern obscurantists.
(My head is spinning with what philosophers, linguists, scientists, scholars of English, and others would do with this distinction of yours.)

_________________
Visit SC Butler, here! Get two SC questions to practice, whose links you can find by date.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. -- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Intern
Joined: 11 Sep 2017
Posts: 36
The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Apr 2019, 19:08
1
1. usage of being in option B and option E , usage of be in opition A,
can any experts clear me the usage of words be and being in the context of above options especially in option E..

actually presence of these words takes few seconds more for me to analyse

2. as per abhimahna post on the usage of with i read those article also,
it states only two usages with can be used one to quote the result and other to state the subcomponent noun, as per that in option e usage is wrong,.. but i am not convinced, is the usage of with in option e wrong? if so kindly enlighten me on this.

3. verb ed or verb ing modifiers are adjective modifiers, similarly is usage of explainable in option C justified as adjective modifier? , whether we can use modifiers like that?
Retired Moderator
Status: enjoying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 5560
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Apr 2019, 22:30
1
Top Contributor
Quote:
The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as

(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is

(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was

(E) Throughout a vast region, Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being

Quote:
bharatmatta wrote:
I rejected options with "one explanation" because the original sentence intends to say that 'a part of the reason is ...'. "One explanation" would mean that there are multiple potential explanations and one of them is... Thoughts?

Whether that is one reason or a part reason or the only reason or one among the many reasons is not an issue here. It is more plausible that it is one among many other reasons. However, before one goes into such hair-splits and rejects those choices, it is necessary to see whether there are any other spontaneously visible errors in the choices.

Take for example,

B and E suffer from 'being' used as a modifier.
In the case of C, The sentence is an outright fragment. In addition, the idiom 'explainable as' is the spoilsport. "explainable by " the correct idiom in the context.
In the case of A, the idiom 'explained as' is wrong. --- "explained by " is the correct idiom.

Can we see why D is the only correct choice? IMHO, this is a sub-600 level question with hardly any compelling need for a discussion

The Take-Away: Grammar First and Then the Rest
_________________
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can,
and above all the wisdom to know the difference.
-The Serenity Prayer - A GMAT aspirant’s first entreaty
Over 200 pages of personal course material on all gamuts of GMAT SC for non-native speakers, value for the money; 919884544509
Manager
Joined: 24 Sep 2018
Posts: 129
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Marketing
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2019, 15:37
The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as: Explained As is wrong uses

(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is: use of being is wrong

(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as : explainable as is wrong uses

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was: CORRECT

(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being: use of being is incorrect
Intern
Joined: 05 May 2019
Posts: 4
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Healthcare
GPA: 3.9
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jul 2019, 14:00
1
[quote="daagh"]A. The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as --- ‘explained as’ is wrong in the context it should be ‘explained by’

B. Thule artifacts being remarkable similar throughout a vast region (no verb), one explanation is—‘being remarkable’ used as modifier is not acceptable

C. That Thule artifacts are remarkable similar throughout a vast region, in part, explainable as – a fragment

D. One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts through a vast region is that there was – the best choice
E. Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkable similar, with one explanation for this being –
Remarkable similar – two adjectives in sequence is weird, it should be ‘remarkably similar’

it is already remarkably similar in option E
_________________
Chetna Kohli
Preparing for GMAT 2020-2021
India, Mumbai.
Not an engineer, but attempt each day to master the calculations
Manager
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 122
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Nov 2019, 06:07
EMPOWERgmatVerbal wrote:
Hello Everyone!

Let's take a closer look at this question, since it appears that the original posting had to be updated at some point to fix typos. We'll look at each option and narrow it down to the right answer. To get started, here is the question with any major differences between each option highlighted in orange:

The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.

(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being

This is INCORRECT because the first clause "Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar" is missing a comma after the word region.

There you have it - option D is the correct answer! This was a difficult question, for sure!

Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.

Hi EMPOWERgmatVerbal
I was looking at 'with' modifier and I stumbled upon this qn.

Let's say we do add a comma - after dependent clause - throughout a vast region and consider this as a stand alone statement (not in context with other options)....Is the usage of 'with' correct? I also change latter part of the sentence to ignore any concerns with being. Is the use of 'With' good here to explain how they were remarkably similar.

Throughout a vast region, Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation that there was a rapid movement..

Official explanation for using 'with' is below
E This version is awkward, introducing the causal connection with the unnecessarily wordy and indirect string of prepositional phrases, with one explanation for this. . . .
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 1004
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Nov 2019, 15:51
snoep wrote:
EMPOWERgmatVerbal wrote:
Hello Everyone!

Let's take a closer look at this question, since it appears that the original posting had to be updated at some point to fix typos. We'll look at each option and narrow it down to the right answer. To get started, here is the question with any major differences between each option highlighted in orange:

The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.

(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being

This is INCORRECT because the first clause "Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar" is missing a comma after the word region.

There you have it - option D is the correct answer! This was a difficult question, for sure!

Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.

Hi EMPOWERgmatVerbal
I was looking at 'with' modifier and I stumbled upon this qn.

Let's say we do add a comma - after dependent clause - throughout a vast region and consider this as a stand alone statement (not in context with other options)....Is the usage of 'with' correct? I also change latter part of the sentence to ignore any concerns with being. Is the use of 'With' good here to explain how they were remarkably similar.

Throughout a vast region, Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation that there was a rapid movement..

Official explanation for using 'with' is below
E This version is awkward, introducing the causal connection with the unnecessarily wordy and indirect string of prepositional phrases, with one explanation for this. . . .

Hello snoep!

Great question! Yes, if we added in that comma I said was missing, the sentence would be technically grammatically correct. However, it is also incredibly awkward and overly wordy. Option D is far less wordy and confusing in its structure, so between the two D would still win out in the end.

I hope that helps! This was a difficult question for sure! Make sure to keep tagging me at EMPOWERgmatVerbal with your questions, and I'll be glad to help!
_________________
"Students study. GMAT assassins train."

The Course Used By GMAT Club Moderators To Earn 750+

souvik101990 Score: 760 Q50 V42 ★★★★★
ENGRTOMBA2018 Score: 750 Q49 V44 ★★★★★
Manager
Joined: 21 Nov 2018
Posts: 164
Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q48 V35
GMAT 2: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 3: 720 Q47 V42
GPA: 3.5
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2020, 23:29
The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as a very rapid movement of people from one end of North America to the other.

(A) The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region can, in part, be explained as – The remarkable similarity explained as a very rapid movement is incorrect.

(B) Thule artifacts being remarkably similar throughout a vast region, one explanation is – both thule artifacts and one explanation are subjects and cannot be joined by a comma.

(C) That Thule artifacts are remarkably similar throughout a vast region is, in part, explainable as – The fact that Thule artifacts are remarkably similar cannot be explained as a very rapid movement.

(D) One explanation for the remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region is that there was – Explanation for the remarkable similarity is a very rapid movement of people from one region to the other. Correct.

(E) Throughout a vast region Thule artifacts are remarkably similar, with one explanation for this being – What is ‘this’ referring to? Wrong usage of ‘being’.
_________________
Beautiful is the one who continues to try despite failure.
Re: The remarkable similarity of Thule artifacts throughout a vast region   [#permalink] 02 Mar 2020, 23:29

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 40 posts ]