<p>i'm getting desperate on this...
does anyone remember some of the questions or correct answers to that passage?
because i found it to be both boring and challenging.
o_O!</p>
<p>One of the answers was "a boat anchor thats 15,000 yrs old"</p>
<p>yeah that's only one i could remember
but there were bunch of other questions that my mind somehow chooses to forget
lol</p>
<p>i think another answer was: both authors agree the exact time when the first people arrived in north america may never be known</p>
<p>Another answer: Passage 1 used a direct quotation to summarize a common opinion.</p>
<p>i remember no1mtsfn's answer~yay!
but i don't quiet recall polkahard's o_o</p>
<p>bump bump anyone else?</p>
<p>no1mtsfn,</p>
<p>Shouldn't the answer to that question be "Both passages thought that land travel during the most recent ice age would have been difficult"? I thought that was the consensus of CC.</p>
<p>^</p>
<p>I don't think so. Passage 1 said that it's very plausible that the first people came by land, but they aren't 100% sure when; Passage 2 said that they probably came by sea but weren't sure when or 100% if they came by sea. So you can infer that both authors probably agree that it may never be known when the first people came.</p>
<p>Passage 1 implied that land travel during the ice age would have been extremely difficult because it tried to pin down the date of the earliest arrival of humans to no earlier than the date of the ice age. In the last paragraph, even though Passage 1 introduces evidence of an even earlier arrival, it doesn't offer an explanation (meaning that the evidence could very well substantiate the sea travel theory, rather than the land travel hypothesis, again giving support to the assumption that Passage 1 thought that land travel during the ice age would have been quite difficult). Passage 2 clearly implies (and actually states, I believe) that land travel would be difficult during the ice age because it posited a theory of sea travel. I don't think that Passage 2 explicitly expresses uncertainty about the date of the first settlers' arrival. It simply doesn't comment on that issue.</p>
<p>Consolidated Clovis Answers</p>
<p>1) a boat anchor thats 15,000 yrs old
2) Passage 1 used direct quotation to summarize a common opinion
3) both authors agree on.....not sure on the answer (land travel during the most recent ice age would have been difficult OR the exact time when the first people arrived in north america may never be known)</p>
<p>Please add anything you remember</p>
<p>i think i remember the direct quote one, but i thought it was what did both passages have in common....but it may not have been!
yay i got some right! i put (for #2) that it was land travel wouldve been hard.</p>
<p>I had what godot had, the land travel would be impossible during ice age because I remember in the first passage it said that the conditions in the ice age were not suitable for travel, so the cloves could not have came before then... none of them said anythink about uncertainty of date... in fact the 2nd paragraph was just talking about how the people who went by sea were prolly the first to enter... the first pargraph said those people in the andes were first and it gave a date</p>
<p>Why isn't it that they both agreed on the fact that early humans ate large mammals? It was explicity stated in both if I remember correctly.</p>
<p>Calgar is right, that answer was the only one explicitly stated. I'm like 80% sure, because the first passage said their tools were left and appeared to be used for hunting mastodons, and the second passage said the Clovis couldnt survive because the mastodons did not have crampons to get over the ice.</p>
<p>oh the ones with the I,II,III one on the reading?
i skipped that one haha...or incorrectly guessed but i def. got that one wrong
i hope the curves are generous...</p>
<p>ughh. yeah, I definitely got that wrong b/c that was the one I needed to change and almost did after we were told to move on b/c I glanced at a sentence and saw the words "hunter-gatherer" at the end of the first passage. Was the answer I and III or all of them?</p>
<p>What is the greatest number you can get wrong on the CR w/o going below a 730?</p>
<p>dude...it was definitely 100% sure that neither were certain about the date of the first people coming. the whole point of the essays were theories about when the first date was...both guessed dates but showed much hesitation about there ever being certainty. especially the first passage but the second one too. anyways, it wasnt the coming over the land one because the first passage implies that the first overland traveling was during the ice age...just not before it, because there would have been no land brige. sorry godot, you misinterpreted some of the info. -_-</p>
<p>Chone,</p>
<p>We have to disagree on this one. I don't think the second passage mentioned much about dates, and, if it did, it did not express uncertainty over them. The first passage indeed implied that land travel would have been difficult during the ice age. Your reasoning makes no sense: there would not have been a land bridge during the ice age (remember that each ice age lasts millions of years!). Therefore, the land travel could have only occurred just after the end of the ice age.</p>
<p>Thoughts from anyone else??</p>