Passage Summary: An old civilization used to burn down big patches of land. Some people think they were clearing space for farms, but there's no proof they actually farmed there, so they probably just stayed hunter-gatherers.

Conclusion: The ancient society in question likely remained a hunter-gatherer society rather than transitioning to agriculture.

Reasoning: While there is evidence that the society burned large tracts of land, there is very little evidence that they actually cultivated crops on that land afterward.

Analysis: The argument relies on the absence of evidence for farming to conclude that the society must have been hunter-gatherers. To strengthen this, look for an answer that provides a 'hunter-gatherer' reason for burning land. If we can show that burning land actually helps hunters—perhaps by attracting game or encouraging the growth of wild berries—it makes the 'hunter-gatherer' conclusion much more plausible. We want to bridge the gap between the act of burning and the specific lifestyle of the people.