context: The new explanation was as weak as the earlier one.
answer_0: Significantly, the Times expressed no skepticism about the two conflicting claims, and did not demand to see evidence for either thesis.
answer_1: In the meantime, the Times expressed no skepticism about the two conflicting claims, and did not demand to see evidence for either thesis.
answer_2: Already, the Times expressed no skepticism about the two conflicting claims, and did not demand to see evidence for either thesis.
answer_3: Particularly, the Times expressed no skepticism about the two conflicting claims, and did not demand to see evidence for either thesis.
answer_4: Importantly, the Times expressed no skepticism about the two conflicting claims, and did not demand to see evidence for either thesis.
answer_5: Actually, the Times expressed no skepticism about the two conflicting claims, and did not demand to see evidence for either thesis.
answer_6: Ironically, the Times expressed no skepticism about the two conflicting claims, and did not demand to see evidence for either thesis.
answer_7: Sometimes, the Times expressed no skepticism about the two conflicting claims, and did not demand to see evidence for either thesis.
answer_8: Perhaps, the Times expressed no skepticism about the two conflicting claims, and did not demand to see evidence for either thesis.
answer_9: In turn, the Times expressed no skepticism about the two conflicting claims, and did not demand to see evidence for either thesis.