Thanks Received: 0
Forum Guests
Posts: 3
Joined: September 22nd, 2011


by ben9990 Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:33 pm

Could you explain why the wrong answers are wrong?

I chose A but wasn't sure about it.
User avatar
Thanks Received: 3030
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
Posts: 4314
Joined: April 01st, 2011

Re: Q14

by ohthatpatrick Fri Nov 16, 2018 2:11 pm

Let's remind ourselves that Olsen's hypothesis is that the Botai were actually riding domesticated horses.

Her evidence:
- tons of horse bones (but it's not clear if they were domesticated horses to be ridden, or wild horses that were hunted for their meat)

- if the horses were hunted or domesticated for their meat, we wouldn't see many adult male bones. But we see tons of adult male bones.

- lots of the horse skeletons are full skeletons (if they had hunted horses for meat, they would have broken down the skeleton into smaller, easier-to-drag pieces) and some of the skeletons are buried with humans (as though a human who got used to riding a horse became friends with it and sentimentally wanted to be buried with it).

(A) butchered horse bones = using horses for meat
untouched horse bones = suggests they were used for riding instead

(B) The quantity of other animals' bones is irrelevant.

(C) Comparing what was going on at this site 6000 years ago to what's happening today is irrelvant.

(D) "Other species of animal" is irrelevant.

(E) The proportion of dead humans to dead horses is irrelevant. It sounds like there aren't that many human bones to begin with, so the ratio will be low but not tell us anything. It was the PROXIMITY of human bones to horse bones, not some RATIO, that made Olsen think that humans had fallen in love with their horses

This is definitely a tough question to process, but since the author was never making her case by referencing other animals, (B) and (D) are clearly irrelevant. Since she wasn't making her case by referencing modern conditions, (C) is out.

I think most of us get down to (A) and (E), and with (E) there's nothing we can say about high ratio vs. low ratio that would argue more in favor of "used them for meat" vs. "rode them".

With (A), we at least have some codewords for "used them for meat" vs. "didn't use them for meat".

In case you're not familiar with the term "butchered horse bones", think of a butcher, whose job it is to break down an animal carcass into ready-to-cook cuts of meat.

Hope this helps.