Doubt related to discussion on: Improve Your Skills Verbal - Identifying Sentence Function 2

[user5095]

so Greg calls the part highlighted in yellow as a fact which is correct. But in the sentence it they are first stating the hypothesis and after the comma specifying the hypothesis is applicable on which area.

To further elaborate, the hypothesis is about global warming not affecting antartic environment and specifically a certain part of antartic.
So, is it necessary to mention the fact in sentence function ? as its just a fluff or additional detail which doesn’t seem to add much to the sentence function exercise.

TLDR: I am trying to understand the necessity of identifying facts as part of SF while doing RC.

P.S. - Although I have gotten some understanding while writing this post. It feels like I have put in too much effort to delete it. And it would be better to validate whether my understanding is right or not.

[margot.e.shumway]

Try removing the highlighted portion and see if the paragraph still makes sense. I don’t think you need to obsess over the sentence but it does give us a brief description of the stability of the environment that M’s hypothesis is based off of. He says sea ice forms on the edges in winter and fall and then mostly goes away in summer. Then he tells us how global warming might change this sea ice formation and then why it’s not so bad. Are you able to understand his reasoning/hypothesis without this fact about the Antarctic environment?

I know this was a while ago that you posted so curious what you think coming back to it now.