Archeologists have found an ancient Coptic town in Northern Africa. Because of debris and collapsed buildings typical of
towns ruined by earthquakes,
archeologists concluded that this town was ruined by an earthquake thought to have occurred in that area in the
seventh century A.D.Premise : A ancient coptic town is found by archealogists in Northern Africa.
Argument in support : Because debris and collapsed buildings are typical signs of a ruined town due to earthquake.
Conclusion: archeologist stated that town must have been ruined by earthquake in 7th centuryNow anything stated that either weakens the notion of earthquake is the cause of complete dismal of town or town was ruined in 7th century is what we need to look for.Each of the following provides some support for the archeologists’ conclusion EXCEPT:
(A) Icons found in the town were all painted no later than in the seventh century A.D.
not helping us to weaken the conclusion.(B) Historical records made by priests and merchants often mention a devastating earthquake that occurred in Northern Africa at that time.
supporting the statement, no good for us(C) Coptic people built fragile buildings, which could easily be ruined by an earthquake.
so yeah debris and collapsed buildings, make sense earthquake could be the cause. But thats not what we are looking for(D) Coins minted in the eighth century A.D. were found in the town.
wait what 8th century.yikes! that means the town was still lively. This surely does the needful! (E) Some other ancient settlements also found in that region proved to be ruined by an earthquake in the seventh century A.D.
Alright earthquake did occur and ruined couple of settlements.