Researchers in Germany

[siddharth_3G]

Researchers in Germany have unearthed 400,000-year-old wooden spears from what it appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground as stunning evidence of human ancestors who systematically hunted big game much earlier than believed.

A. it appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground as stunning evidence of human ancestors who
B. it appears had been an ancient lakeshore hunting ground and stunning evidence that human ancestors
C. appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground and is stunning evidence that human ancestors
D. appears to be an ancient lakeshore hunting ground, stunning evidence that human ancestors
E. appears that it is an ancient lakeshore hunting ground, stunning evidence of human ancestors who

[t_ujwal]

Researchers in Germany have unearthed 400,000-year-old wooden spears from what it appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground as stunning evidence of human ancestors who systematically hunted big game much earlier than believed.

A. it appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground as stunning evidence of human ancestors who
B. it appears had been an ancient lakeshore hunting ground and stunning evidence that human ancestors
C. appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground and is stunning evidence that human ancestors
D. appears to be an ancient lakeshore hunting ground, stunning evidence that human ancestors
E. appears that it is an ancient lakeshore hunting ground, stunning evidence of human ancestors who

IMO D.
A,B and E have the pronoun 'it' without a proper noun referrent in the sentence. C uses past tense incorrectly since the sentence is in present tense.


Ujwal

[vnf]

Researchers in Germany have unearthed 400,000-year-old wooden spears from what it appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground as stunning evidence of human ancestors who systematically hunted big game much earlier than believed.

A. it appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground as stunning evidence of human ancestors who
B. it appears had been an ancient lakeshore hunting ground and stunning evidence that human ancestors
C. appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground and is stunning evidence that human ancestors
D. appears to be an ancient lakeshore hunting ground, stunning evidence that human ancestors
E. appears that it is an ancient lakeshore hunting ground, stunning evidence of human ancestors who

Vote for (D)

[star_321]

Bump...

Guys can anybody explain what does 'stunning evidence.....' modifies in option D....

I am confused .don't understand this sentence....

[zoom2suman]

I think 'it' is not at all ambigous, it refers to Germany...Of all D is the best.

[tamdt197]

I agree with everybody, I choose D

[rrakesh]

IMO E. Can someone tell me why E is wrong here?

[bear&bull]

Researchers in Germany have unearthed 400,000-year-old wooden spears from what it appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground as stunning evidence of human ancestors who systematically hunted big game much earlier than believed.

A. it appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground as stunning evidence of human ancestors who
B. it appears had been an ancient lakeshore hunting ground and stunning evidence that human ancestors


first : what it appears or what appears or it appears to be ?

if the phrase before what is preceded by a preposition use what appears

for direct statement use it appears to be

what after it does not do any good

eliminate A and B

E. appears that it is an ancient lakeshore hunting ground, stunning evidence of human ancestors who

It should have a reference
NONE

eliminate E

Between C and D

C. appears was an ancient lakeshore hunting ground and is stunning evidence that human ancestors
D. appears to be an ancient lakeshore hunting ground, stunning evidence that human ancestors

stem test :
Researchers in Germany have unearthed 400,000-year-old wooden spears from what appears to blah.. blah
" and "
Researchers in Germany have unearthed 400,000-year-old wooden spears from what is stunning evidence that human ancestors

Don't you think something is wrong in the second part ?

it is trying to say they have unearthed something from the stunning evidence

changes the meaning
rt?
moreover was is wrong
Why?
they have present perfect
what appears was an ancient . but now it does not appear to be the same ?

IMO D
HTH!

[bear&bull]

Bump...

Guys can anybody explain what does 'stunning evidence.....' modifies in option D....

I am confused .don't understand this sentence....

stunning is used here as cause and effect

Star scored 800, stunning Everyone on the forum

HTH!

[zoom2suman]

nice explaination Bear....thanks.