Question

Which of the following findings, if true, would add further evidence to support the hyper-disease theory of giant ground sloth extinction?

• A. evidence to support the idea that giant ground sloths became entirely extinct when humans and dogs first migrated together to the area
• B. evidence to support the idea that the radiocarbon dating on the Cuba and Hispaniola fossils was incorrect
• C. evidence to support the idea that giant ground sloths survived the last Ice Age
• D. evidence to support the idea that giant ground sloths survived long after humans and dogs migrated into their habitats
• E. evidence to support the idea that the giant ground sloth's body size and population numbers did not make it vulnerable to disease

Hint:

When evaluating scientific theories, focus on evidence that directly supports or contradicts the core concept of the theory.

Answer 1

Answer: (E)

Step 1: Understanding the hyper-disease theory.
The hyper-disease theory suggests that the giant ground sloth's large size and small population made it more susceptible to disease. If true, evidence would need to support the idea that the sloth's biology contributed to its vulnerability.

Step 2: Analysis of options.
- (A) This option refers to the extinction of the sloth, but it is more related to human and dog migration, not disease vulnerability.
- (B) Incorrect radiocarbon dating would challenge the timeline of extinction but doesn't relate to the hyper-disease theory directly.
- (C) Surviving the Ice Age is more related to climate change than disease susceptibility.
- (D) The idea that sloths survived after humans and dogs migrated contradicts the idea of extinction caused by disease.
- (E) This option directly challenges the hyper-disease theory, indicating that the sloth's body size and population were not factors in making it vulnerable to disease. This would be key evidence against the theory.

Step 3: Conclusion.
The correct answer is (E), as it directly supports or refutes the disease-related extinction theory.