SAT OwlQuestion bank / Command of Evidence
Archaeologist Wen Liu argues that the stone towers found along a stretch of ancient coastline were built as signal stations. Guards in each tower, she claims, could see fires lit in the next tower along the coast and could pass warnings of approaching ships from one tower to the next far faster than a messenger could travel.
Which finding, if true, would most directly weaken Liu's argument?
Many of the towers contain hearths with thick layers of ash.
From most of the towers, the nearest neighboring tower cannot be seen because hills block the view.
The towers were built from stone that had been quarried several kilometers inland and hauled to the coast.
Similar towers have been found along other ancient coastlines.
Show answer and explanation
Answer: B
Liu's argument depends on guards in one tower being able to see fires in the next. If hills block the view between most neighboring towers, signals couldn't pass from tower to tower, which undercuts the argument, choice B.
Choice C may look like a problem for the argument, but where the stone came from has no bearing on whether the towers could signal one another.
Why the other choices are wrong
- A. Hearths with thick ash fit towers where fires were lit often, so this is consistent with Liu's argument.
- C. Where the stone was quarried has no bearing on whether the towers could send signals to one another.
- D. Similar towers elsewhere don't show whether these towers could see one another, so this doesn't weaken the argument.
Got it wrong? On SAT Owl, Owl looks at the answer you chose and explains the exact mistake, then gives you similar questions until it sticks. Get your predicted SAT score free, or take a free full-length practice test.