jpchris3 Wrote:For E, when the author says "...admit of simpler, nonolfactory explanations..," I interpreted that to mean that whatever criticism was raised against Papi's hypothesis can be discounted.
This is not what the author was suggesting. Rather it is Papi's hypothesis that can probably be rejected - not a criticism of Papi's hypothesis.
The author describes two alternatives for the homing ability of pigeons: "outward displacement" and some sort of "map sense." The author challenges the outward displacement mechanism and suggests some sort of "map sense" is more likely to be the explanation. Papi has suggested that the "map sense" is olfactory. The author, however, believes this is unlikely to be the case (lines 50-51).
So what would the author and Papi be mostly likely to agree with? Papi offers one means by which homing pigeons might implement some sort of "map sense." The author may not believe that Papi's explanation is very likely, but does believe that some sort of "map sense" is still the likely explanation (lines 34-35). So answer choice (C) is something both the author and Papi would agree on.
Incorrect Answers(A) is challenged by the author (lines 51-53).
(B) is challenged by the author (line 16).
(D) is unsupported. The author does not offer a comparative value of the experimental results conducted so far.
(E) is challenged by the author (lines 46-49).