Question 199·200 Super-Hard SAT Reading Questions·Information and Ideas
Wooden beams recovered from a thirteenth-century warehouse at Port Rellan have generally been assumed to come from nearby coastal oak forests. Because chemical signatures in timber vary with soil and rainfall, dendrochronologist Mina Okafor analyzed the beams alongside regional tree-ring records. Okafor proposes that the warehouse’s builders imported the oak from forests in the inland Arlen Highlands and that they did so because several years of saltwater flooding had weakened the coastal trees shortly before construction.
Which finding, if true, would most directly support Okafor’s proposal?
For an evidence question involving a multipart proposal, test each choice against every component of the proposal and compare the scope of the evidence. Prefer evidence tied directly to the specific people, object, and decision under discussion over broader evidence that establishes only a regional correlation.
Hints
Separate the proposal into two claims
Identify what the proposal says about the beams’ geographic origin and why the builders selected that source.
Consider the scope of the evidence
Distinguish evidence about timber imports across the entire region from evidence about the sourcing decision for this particular warehouse.
Look for the causal link
The strongest evidence should do more than establish that two events occurred at about the same time; it should connect the warehouse’s decision to the flood damage.
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify both parts of the proposal
Okafor proposes that the beams came from the Arlen Highlands and that the warehouse’s builders selected that source because flooding had damaged coastal oak.
Evaluate the evidence of origin
A unique match between the beams and Arlen Highlands samples directly supports the claim about where the beams originated.
Evaluate the causal connection
The cutting dates follow the flooding, and the warehouse’s own records show that its orders shifted from coastal oak to Arlen oak after suppliers reported saltwater damage. This evidence connects the specific sourcing decision to the proposed reason for that decision.
Compare the strongest alternative
Regionwide increases in Arlen imports after the flooding provide relevant circumstantial evidence, but they do not show why this particular warehouse changed its timber source. Warehouse-specific ordering records therefore support Okafor’s causal proposal more directly.