Option (1) is intricate as it fails to directly address the core issue – if Mayr was incorrect, what was the correct perspective? Ehrlich and Raven's argument is not clear. Similarly, (2) provides evidence but lacks a clear thesis statement. The ideal approach is to express your viewpoint on the topic directly and concisely in one sentence. Although (4) comes close by referencing "gene flow," the answer is (3) – as indicated in the third paragraph - where it is stated that "isolation and gene flow were less important to evolutionary divergence than natural selection." Therefore, the correct answer is (3).
Ehrlich and Raven acknowledge in the third paragraph that gene flow contributes to evolutionary divergence, stating, "isolation and gene flow were less important to evolutionary divergence than natural selection," indicating that isolation and gene flow have some importance in evolutionary divergence. This point is also reiterated in the last sentence of the passage. Therefore, (2) is the correct choice. Additionally, (3) is supported by information in the first paragraph, mentioning the separation of populations over geologic scales of time. Furthermore, (4) finds support in the second paragraph, which describes three groups that rarely interacted despite their close proximity.
The passage does not suggest that evolution is a sensitive or controversial topic, so (1) is eliminated. The determination of whether Ehrlich and Raven's thesis superseded Mayr's is not made in the passage, ruling out (2). The merits of checkerspot butterflies are not discussed in the passage, so (4) is also eliminated. The passage focuses on Mayr, Ehrlich, and Raven in the context of theories of speciation, making (3) the correct answer.
\(\text{The Politics of Change}\) | \(\text{The Change in Politics}\) | \(\text{Politics and Change:}\) A Global Perspective} |
In "The Politics of Change," political analyst Dr. Emily Harper examines the dynamics of social movements and their impact on policy reform. Through detailed case studies, she explores how grassroots organizations, protests, and advocacy campaigns shape public opinion and influence lawmakers. Dr. Harper provides insights into the strategies that successful movements employ and discusses the challenges they face in a complex political landscape. She discusses key strategies, such as coalition-building, media engagement, and the use of digital platforms to amplify voices. | This book by veteran journalist Mark Stevens investigates the shifting political landscape in the 21st century. Focusing on major elections, emerging political parties, and the role of social media, Stevens analyzes how technology and demographics are transforming political engagement and voter behaviour. Through interviews with political leaders, campaign strategists, and everyday voters, Stevens uncovers how demographic shifts and technological advancements are reshaping political discourse in urban areas. He analyzes the implications of these changes for traditional political institutions and explores how movements like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter have disrupted conventional narratives. | In this insightful work, international relations scholar Dr. Anika Patel presents a global analysis of political change across various regions. She explores the factors that drive political transitions, including economic shifts, cultural movements, and international influences. Dr. Patel emphasizes the interconnectedness of global politics and how local changes can have far-reaching implications. She analyzes various factors driving political transitions, including economic upheaval, cultural shifts, and the impact of globalization. She provides case studies from diverse regions, such as the Arab Spring, democratic movements in Latin America, and shifts in power in Asia. The book serves as a vital resource for understanding the complexities of political evolution in a rapidly changing world. |