An ancient Pavonian text describes how an army of one million enemies of Pavonia stopped to drink at a certain lake and drank the lake dry. Recently, archaeologists discovered that water-based life was suddenly absent just after the event was alleged by the text to have occurred. On the basis of reading the text and an account of the archaeological evidence, some students concluded that the events described really took place. Which one of the following is a questionable technique used by the students to reach their conclusion? ['rejecting a hypothesis because it is seemingly self-contradictory', 'considering people and locations whose existence cannot be substantiated by modern historians', 'ignoring available, potentially useful counterevidence', 'taking evidence that a text has correctly described an effect to show that the text has correctly described the cause']