Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is not mine. I have studied this material enough not to be confused by confusing writing. I wouldn't recommend this article to a junior-high student, however. [EDIT:] Actually I don't recommend it to you either. Just above this thread you're on about being "able to deduce the former existence of creatures that left no physical trace." Seriously? Hearing implies echolocation by predators? I can hear; so ca…
The claim is that, by the evidence, moths had ultrasonic hearing 28 million years before bats' own echolocation developed; and that some moths in environments without bats have since adapted to lower ranges. We must presume paleontologists can recognize the frequency range sensitivity of these structures from their preserved physical shape. In what way would hearing not sensitive to frequencies that appear in the env…
One might have expected one of "the greatest writers on nature" not to have so confused his ardent fan.