The last members of a now-extinct species of a European wild deer called the giant deer lived in Ireland about 16,000 years ago. Prehistoric cave paintings in France depict this animal as having a large hump on its back. Fossils of this animal, however, do not show any hump. Nevertheless, there is no reason to conclude that the cave paintings are therefore inaccurate in this regard, since __________.
(A) some prehistoric cave paintings in France also depict other animals as having a hump
(B) fossils of the giant deer are much more common in Ireland than in France
(C) animal humps are composed of fatty tissue, which does not fossilize
(D) the cave paintings of the giant deer were painted well before 16,000 years ago
(E) only one currently existing species of deer has any anatomical feature that even remotely resembles a hump
This is a Complete the Theme Question Type.
Strategy to Solve such questions: We have a paradox in the question. The Giant deer that lived 16,000 years ago were depicted as having humps in prehistoric paintings. But the fossils do not show any hump. The author says that the paintings cannot be called inaccurate. This means that we have to find an option that would give us the missing link to the puzzle. An option that would justify the paintings.
The argument gives us the following details.
The last members of a now-extinct species of a European wild deer called the giant deer lived in Ireland about 16,000 years ago.
Prehistoric cave paintings in France depict this animal as having a large hump on its back.
However, the Fossils of this animal do not show any hump.
Nevertheless, there is no reason to conclude that the cave paintings are therefore inaccurate in this regard since?
We need to find an option that justifies the paintings. An option that would show why the animals are depicted as having humps when the fossils show otherwise.
Option A- Just because there are other prehistoric paintings that depict other animals as having a hump does not justify that the cave paintings are accurate.
Option B- fossils of the giant deer are much more common in Ireland than in France- This comparison is irrelevant and does not give us a reason as to why the paintings can still be considered accurate.
Option C- animal humps are composed of fatty tissue, which does not fossilize- This tells us that the paintings were accurate. The reason why the humps were found in the paintings and not found in the fossils is because the humps do not fossilize. The humps were a part of the animals, as shown in the paintings, but fossils do not show any humps because humps do not fossilize.
Option D- the cave paintings of the giant deer were painted well before 16,000 years ago.
The cave paintings were painted well before 16000 years ago and depict these animals as having a large hump on their backs. This still does not tell us why the fossils of these animals do not show any hump.
Option E - only one currently existing species of deer has any anatomical feature that even remotely resembles a hump
Again, this does not tell us why the paintings can still be accurate.
Therefore this leaves us with option C as the correct answer.