Solution
Step-by-step process:
First, identify what each option claims -> Then check if the passage supports it
Since this is an EXCEPT question, three options will be TRUE (supported by passage) and one will be FALSE (not supported) -> That FALSE one is the correct answer
From passage: "More accurately, the stability of the subnivium depends on the interaction between snow depth and snow density."
From passage: "a constant temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit can often be 30 to 40 degrees warmer than the air temperature during the peak of winter"
From passage: "They found that soil frost in the snow-free area resulted in damage to plant roots and sometimes even the death of the plant"
The passage discusses climate change effects -> Says winters might seem beneficial at first glance -> But then explains why the consequences are actually negative -> No positive effects are actually described
🟢 Option 1 -> TRUE -> directly supported by passage about snow depth and density interaction
🔴 Option 2 -> FALSE -> passage mentions climate change might seem beneficial at first but then explains only negative effects (colder subnivium, less protection, damage to plants)
🟢 Option 3 -> TRUE -> exact temperature difference is stated in paragraph 2
🟢 Option 4 -> TRUE -> experiments showing plant damage from snow removal are described
Key insight: The passage says warmer winters "seem beneficial" at first glance but then explains this isn't true -> It only describes negative climate change effects on the subnivium -> No actual positive effects are mentioned
The correct answer is Option 2 because it's the only statement NOT supported by the passage.
More from this set:
Question 7
Question 10