| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ashwinvkum2938
Joined: 11 Aug 2009 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 12:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Can't there be two answers to this question?
In addition to saying that the situation in Sahel resulted in the widespread use of the term (desertification) the passage also says, "But in the Sahel or in western Rajasthan (India), desertification causes great human misery—starvation or malnutrition for untold millions of people. Thus the explanation that "There is no evidence to suggest that desertification in the Sahel resulted in "starvation and malnutrition among the peoples of Rajasthan" (answer choice B) since they are on two different continents." might not be true. Right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jellywing_2058
Joined: 04 May 2009 Posts: 179
|
Posted: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Actually, the explanation makes perfect sense. Rajasthan and Sahel are in different continents, and it is not because the Sahel region goes through desertification that Rajasthan will too. The millions of people affected by desertification are from the Sahel region in this case and not from another disconnected continent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|