Q8 - George: Some scientists say

[gmatalongthewatchtower]

I chose A. HEre's my reasoning:

Scientists - say that the global warming will occur because of Carbon dioxide (Future tense)
George - No, the global warming is occuring already. (Main conclusion/point) because of PREMISE1

PREMISE1 - weather in George's area is weird.

My inference -there is something else that's causing the global warming.

A) matches my "evaluation"

Can you please help me to explain why A) is incorrect?

Thanks
Voodoo

[ohthatpatrick]

Here's how you correctly represented George's argument:

Conc: Global warming is already occurring

Prem: Weather in my area is weirdly warm

To analyze that argument core, we are asking ourselves, "If I accept that the weather in George's area is weirdly warm, do I have to accept that global warming is already occurring?"

To argue with George's argument, we would take the position that global warming is NOT already occurring.

What (A) deals with, the purported cause of global warming, has nothing to do with George's argument core.

The correct answer to an Evaluate question should strengthen if answered one way and weaken if answered the opposite way. Let's try that with (A).

Carbon dioxide is the only cause of global warming.
Does that strengthen or weaken the claim that "global warming is already occurring"?

No. The issue of whether or not it's occurring is completely separate from what may or may not be causing it.

Carbon dioxide is NOT the only cause of global warming.
Again, this has no effect on the claim that "global warming is already occurring". It also has no effect on George's evidence that "the weather in my area is weird". He never claimed to know what is causing global warming. He only claimed that global warming is happening.

We need an answer that calls into question whether global warming is happening, not what is causing global warming to occur. If we're arguing over whether CO2 is the only cause of global warming or not the only cause of global warming, we're accepting as true the idea that global warming is happening. So we're not fighting with George's conclusion at all.

Revisiting our core:
weather in my area is warm ---?--> global warming is happening

This is a sampling flaw. Can we assume that the weather in George's area is a representative sample of global weather patterns?

(E) gets right to that issue.

If we say unusually warm weather IS happening globally more frequently than before, then we strengthen George's argument that global warming is currently happening.

If we say unusually warm weather IS NOT happening globally more frequently than before, then we weaken George's argument that global warming is currently happening.

==other answers=
(B) We believe George's premise, that the leaves were late in changing color. We don't need to question this.

(C) We don't care exactly what proportion of CO2 emissions comes from burning trees. George's argument core has nothing to do with CO2 emissions or trees. That 1st sentence has nothing to do with George's argument core.

(D) This is temptingly close to an answer that would propose an alternative cause for why the leaves in George's area are late in turning color. However, this isn't about causing leaves to turn color more quickly or slowly. It's about leaves falling off. That's not relevant to George's evidence or his conclusion.


Hope this helps.