Does Adjective play a vital role in Critical Reasoning?

[AsadA969]

Once upon a time, several people gathered in Washington DC from California to watch a video clips in Government Television, which proved the real terrorist of that time. The government is blah blah blah……..

[Conclusion] Scientists have hypothesized that the video clips was telecasted in a color television.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the scientists' hypothesis?

Correct Answer:
If the correct answer option proves that it is ONLY by “television” or it is by “black and white television” it’ll definitely be wrong! The correct answer option must prove that it is ONLY by color television”, isn’t it?
I want to have the attention of Manhattan GMAT instructors. If my thinking is wrong could you please correct me?
Thanks.

[RonPurewal]

there are no 'rules' for this. an adjective may be important; it may not. it is impossible to generalize; this type of decision, like everything else at the heart of CR, must be made on a question-by-question basis.

if you have properly digested the point that is discussed/debated in a problem—to such an extent that you can imagine being involved in the situation, or else having a conversation about it—then you will IMMEDIATELY know whether any given adjective/qualifier/description matters in that problem.

[AsadA969]

^^ So, it'll be better for me if you make an argument, at least with one correct answer option, in which "adjective" plays a vital role in CR keeping the consistency with my starting point ( e.g., Once upon a time, several people gathered in Washington DC from California to watch a video clips in Government Television, which proved the real terrorist of that time. The government is blah blah blah……..[Conclusion] Scientists have hypothesized that the video clips was telecasted in a color television. Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the scientists' hypothesis?)
Thanks

[RonPurewal]

i'm sorry, but i have no idea what you are asking.

also, i still can't make any sense of the example, for several different reasons—really, i can't figure out the siginificance of anything in it.
(what does 'watching video clips' have to do with 'terrorism'? what is 'Government Television'? if something is broadcast on television, why does it matter that people watch it in a group?)

[AsadA969]

Exactly.

Okay, I am trying to make an another argument (not full argument; it is just hints to make an argument).

Suppose, there are 10 owners of a specific shopping mall. Some terrorists (X,Y, and Z) did a crime in a shopping mall and this terrorism was recorded/captured in the Surveillance Camera of the Shopping mall by the authority. Here, 6 owners of the shopping mall who did not accept the claim that there is STRONG relationship between the terrorist and this 6 owners. So, for that reason these 6 people had been called in the specific room to proof that there is a STRONG relationship (not only relationship) between the terrorists and these 6 specific owners.
Conclusion: XYZ clearly says that ...............Strong Relationship with those 6 owner of the shopping mall.
Question Stem: Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the XYZ's hypothesis?
Correct Answer: I’ll make a correct answer keeping the consistency with argument in which the answer will proof that the relation between the terrorists and those 6 owners was STRONG. So, could you please help me to make an answer option like that?

If I am still unable to make clear you, I request you to give OG reference in which CONCLUSION’s ADJECTIVE will play a vital role when we will choose a correct answer option.
Thanks Ron.

[Chelsey Cooley]

I do agree with Ron's initial comment about general CR strategy, but let me try to understand what situation you're thinking about. Would this mini-argument be a fair example?

Sarah had an allergic reaction to those cupcakes. She must have a wheat allergy.

Strengthener: the cupcakes were made with wheat flour.
Weakener: the cupcakes did not contain any wheat products.

If that's what you're thinking about, then sure, it's important to pay careful attention to adjectives in arguments - because the GMAT often puts critical pieces of a conclusion in them. (This is especially true when your adjectives are 'logical' ones, like 'every', 'only', etc. - and in fact, it's not just true of adjectives, but of modifiers in conclusions in general.) But on the other hand, spending too much energy picking apart the grammar of a CR argument will make you miss the forest for the trees.

[AsadA969]

Thank you so much Chelsey Cooley. I got your analogy, and it'll help me to comprehend whole the matter. Thanks also Ron to detect lack in my analogy.

[RonPurewal]

glad to help.