Neanderthals vanished around roughly the same time that modern humans

Question

Neanderthals vanished around roughly the same time that modern humans arrived in Eurasia, and many scientists suspect the two events are closely linked. One popular theory is that modern humans contributed to the demise of their close cousins, either by outcompeting them for resources or through open conflict.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the popular theory described above?

A. A recent study of Shanidar 3, one of the Neanderthals campsite discovered, concluded that the Neanderthals likely died of a rib wound that could have been created by the kind of projectile weapons used by modern humans living at the time.

B. Scientists have recently discovered some bones and teeth belonging to modern humans that looked as though they had been killed by Neanderthals.

C. Recently excavated fossils provide sustainable evidence that the Neanderthals died out because they couldn’t reproduce fast enough to keep up with modern humans.

D. Some Scientists argue that the Neanderthals may have had a harder time during childbirth due to the large head of Neanderthal babies.

E. Several volcanoes in Eurasia have erupted in quick succession about 40,000 years ago before modern humans arrived in Europe.

Bounce1987 · Answer

The answer should be D. Answer choice D implies that a factor related to problems during giving birth could have possibly led to Neanderthal's extinction in Eurasia. This answer choice weakens the author's conclusion by citing an alternate explanation than the one offered by the argument.

abhimahna · Answer

Hi  Bounce1987  ,

D cannot be the answer. It says mothers used to cry a lot when they used to give son to their babies as the head of the baby was too big. How does it tell us they got extinct? This option is completely OFS.

Okay, so we need to weaken the theory that says Humans killed Neanderthals.

A. A recent study of Shanidar 3, one of the Neanderthals campsite discovered, concluded that the Neanderthals likely died of a rib wound that could have been created by the kind of projectile weapons used by modern humans living at the time. -->  Strengthener

B. Scientists have recently discovered some bones and teeth belonging to modern humans that looked as though they had been killed by Neanderthals. -->  Strengthener

C. Recently excavated fossils provide sustainable evidence that the Neanderthals died out because they couldn’t reproduce fast enough to keep up with modern humans.
 
D. Some Scientists argue that the Neanderthals may have had a harder time during childbirth due to the large head of Neanderthal babies. -->  As discussed above

E. Several volcanoes in Eurasia have erupted in quick succession about 40,000 years ago before modern humans arrived in Europe.  --> Irrelevant

rekhabishop · Answer

I was tied up between D and E. Chose E, but realized that the OA is C?? Experts, please help.

abhimahna · Answer

Hi  rekhabishop  ,

Please look  here  for why D is incorrect.

E is irrelevant because it says there were some volcano eruptions. Fine but how do you Neanderthals were present 40,000 years ago only? It may happen that Neanderthals were present just 10000 years ago. Hence, incorrect.

Does that make sense?

rekhabishop · Answer

Isn't C supporting the argument?
Lower birth rate means that they were out competed (survival of the fittest), right?

abhimahna · Answer

Hi  rekhabishop  ,

Here is the catch:

The theory is saying Humans led to the demise. We have to weaken it and say No, something else was the reason.

Option C says (as you mentioned )survival of the fittest is the reason.

hence, the theory is weakened.

Does that make sense?

va95 · Answer

I don't understand how can the OA be C. Statement says that Neanderthals died because they couldn't reproduce fast enough to keep up with  Modern Human.  Doesn't that prove that modern human  out-competed  Neanderthals?? Therefore C rather strengthens.

It would weaken the conclusion if the statement had the following structure:  "Recently excavated fossils provide sustainable evidence that the Neanderthals died out because they couldn’t reproduce fast enough to keep the population growth positive"

Experts, please, correct me if I am wrong.

abhimahna · Answer

Hi  Vardan95  ,

Please read the explanation given for C  here

ShashankDave · Answer

Hi,
Let me try to explain this.
The arguement is   Whether modern humans somehow CONTRIBUTED to the downfall of Neanderthals

The arguement states that they did. To weaken this argument, we would have to point out that the humans were not responsible for or contributed to the downfall, but it was something else.
Option C clearly states that it was in fact the Neanderthals themselves responsible for their own downfall since they were the ones who couldn't reproduce enough. 
Now..were it the humans who somehow contributed to this lack of active reproduction? No. Therefore, C.
I hope this helps.

Posted from my mobile device

va95 · Answer

Hello
I've read it before posting. The thing is that I find your reasoning for C rather controversial. If C implies the survival of the fittest, it means that X  out-competes  Y. Therefore C strengthens.

Again, C would weaken only if the statement was not linked to Modern Human species.

abhimahna · Answer

Hi Vardan95 , Okay, so you are making some assumptions here. If X is not growing as quickly as Y, then it doesn't mean X outcompetes Y. Consider it like this: Humans are 1000 and Neatheral are 100 at this time. Now,Humans are growing way too faster than Neatherals. I can say Humans grew to 100000000 in one year but neatheral grew only to 200. Wow, very negligible count of Neatherals! Don't you think this weakens the conclusion saying that Humans are not actually competing rather it is Neatherals fault that they can't reproduce quickly? Poor Neatherals!!

pra1785 · Answer

Hi,

I am confused by B is a strengthener.

The argument says humans killed neanderthals. Option B says the opposite. Isn't that weakening the argument? Can you please help me figure out where I am wrong in my reasoning?

abhimahna · Answer

Hi  pra1785  ,

I am happy to help.

Look at the words "either by outcompeting them for resources or  through open conflict ."

What does it mean? It means there was some sort of war that would have happened between the two. Now, if you say humans would have not died during that war, I won't believe you at all.

Hence, finding bones of human is inevitable and thus it strengthens the fact that there must be some sort of war at that time.

Does that make sense?

vish1403 · Answer

Survival of the fittest is the reason, but argument compares it with modern humans as they were outplayed by them in survival???

Neanderthals vanished around roughly the same time that modern humans

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Neanderthals vanished around roughly the same time that modern humans

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards