Q24 - The asteroid that hit

[dan]

24. (D)
Question type: Application
The flaws in the original argument are that two consequences mentioned aren’t necessarily the only two consequences of the asteroid, and the fact that we cannot prove that fire and /or climate change caused the triceratops to go extinct doesn’t mean that they didn’t in fact do so. Therefore, the conclusion is based on an incomplete understanding. Perhaps some other consequence of the asteroid caused triceratops to go extinct, or perhaps it was climate change or fire and we just can’t prove it yet. Answer choice (D) contains the same type of flawed, incomplete understanding, and is therefore correct.

(A) is flawed, but not in the same way as the original argument.
(B) is flawed, but not in the same way as the original argument.
(C) is flawed, but not in the same way as the original argument.
(D) is flawed, but not in the same way as the original argument.

[farhadshekib]

24. (D)
Question type: Application
The flaws in the original argument are that two consequences mentioned aren’t necessarily the only two consequences of the asteroid, and the fact that we cannot prove that fire and /or climate change caused the triceratops to go extinct doesn’t mean that they didn’t in fact do so. Therefore, the conclusion is based on an incomplete understanding. Perhaps some other consequence of the asteroid caused triceratops to go extinct, or perhaps it was climate change or fire and we just can’t prove it yet. Answer choice (D) contains the same type of flawed, incomplete understanding, and is therefore correct.

(A) is flawed, but not in the same way as the original argument.
(B) is flawed, but not in the same way as the original argument.
(C) is flawed, but not in the same way as the original argument.
(D) is flawed, but not in the same way as the original argument.

Thx for the post.

I am wondering if you will please evaluate my reasoning?

I was able to eliminate A, B and E by just comparing the conclusion of the answer choices to that in the stimulus.

A) "Thus, I DOUBT that Leon and Pam can move the piano together";

B) "either WE KNOW that Chen will win or we know that Lin will win";

and E) "It IS REASONABLE TO MAINTAIN that the cause of the flooding was either the sun or the moon".

None of these parallel, in my opinion, the conclusion of the stimulus: "Hence, WE CANNOT ATTRIBUTE the triceratops extinction to the asteroid's impact"...

Is my line of reasoning correct?

[uhdang]

If anyone could check my reasoning, I would appreciate it.
I tend to make the whole stimulus as an abstract structure while pointing out the flaw.
Here is the Abstract Structure of the stimulus:

P: A (Asteroid hit) caused X (long-term climate change) and Y (firestorm).
P: cannot show Y caused B (extinction of triceratops)
P: cannot show X caused B
C: cannot attribute B to A.
>> This is false dilemma flaw where the author limits possible causes to be only what were given (X and Y). What if A has caused something else that led to B? or something that X or Y indirectly caused resulted in B?

Now, let's compare this with answer choices.

A)
can move this piano => can lift at least 150 kg
L or P => ~can lift 150 kg
L or P => ~can move this piano
C: ~L and P can move this piano together
>> “together” quality came out of nowhere.

B)
C and L are only candidates in the mayoral election => C or L will win the election
C: C will win or L will win
>> No flaw

C)
Not proven that accident was caused by J’s excessive speed
Not proven that accident was caused by J’s weaving out of lane
C: Not both
>> There has to be something that led to excessive speed and weaving out of lane to be parallel to the stimulus.

D)
F (Flooding) caused X (Damage to furnace) and Y (short in electrical system).
could not show X caused the fire
could not show Y caused the fire
C: Cannot attribute F to the fire.
>> This is it.

E)
Good reason : Caused of the flooding => unusually high tides
Good reason : cause of the flood => either sun or the moon
Reasonable to maintain the cause is sun or the moon.
>> Didn’t give the reason why stuck to the second statement.

The answer is D).