Passage Summary: Archaeologists found island rock art that doesn't show sea creatures. Since the artists had to eat sea creatures to get to the islands, some argue this proves the art wasn't just a record of what people were eating.

Conclusion: The theory that northern cave paintings primarily reflect the artists' current diets is likely incorrect.

Reasoning: Artists traveling to Norwegian islands must have consumed sea animals to survive the trip, yet these animals are not clearly represented in the island rock art.

Analysis: The argument rests on the assumption that if a creature was a staple of the diet, it necessarily would have been a subject of the paintings. To weaken the attack on the theory, we need to find reasons why the absence of sea animal paintings doesn't actually disprove the 'diet theory.' Look for an answer that suggests the artists did eat those animals but didn't paint them for a specific reason, or that they didn't actually eat them at all. Since this is a 'Weaken EXCEPT' question, the correct choice will be the only one that either strengthens the argument or is simply irrelevant.