C would be great if you swap inconsistent with consistent

L

i think the biggest mistake i made was not understanding that the first premise is causal.

advent chem fert caused alfalfa

as a result of that EFFECT, blah blah blah

wow

I guess the interbreeding wouldn't help the hypothesis that they adapted to become two distinct populations because they evolved generationally to become genetically different rather than adapted on their own. which is a stretch because isn't interbreeding a process of adaptation and therefore evolution??? maybe that two-step assumption is the problem because forcing you to make that assumption isn't necessarily supporting the argument in a strong way. compared to A which rules that possibility out leaving just the adapting on their own hypothesis to look really good... my brain hurts

principle dangling possibilities in front of me like an emotionally unavailable boy....

I assumed cold weather and cooler months were the same thing. I flipped the NC and SC for the colder month conditional in my head chose B because of that … sad trumpet

I made several many mistakes but the biggest mistake was not realizing E came to the wrong conclusion based on the facts that fulfilled the second principle’s SCs.

That would require you to know beforehand or assume that sibling species are or are not different species which is information that the argument just doesn’t give us. As far as we know, sibling spieces look the same and typology theory says if they look the same they are the same so that all checks out.

I assumed a description of the Super Mega Attractive Silk Road qualities was evidence that the road was definitely used for migration one million years ago AND that this was a sub conclusion that supported the main conclusion ba dum tsssss

I assumed general future trends (A) was synonymous with human life span trends whomp whomp

Verdict: belief that sugar makes ADD worse is false

Evidence: all of our test groups have the same level of hyperactivity (but they never tells us what that level is)

Weaken: the control group eating sugar sub made ADD worse;

same level as the other groups (as stated in stim);

That must mean the other groups (real sugars) made ADD worse

So… the verdict would be incorrect if ^ is true; sugar DOES make ADD worse

I believed that the purple haired people would lead me to victory...

If l miss one more of these→ I am setting this (metaphorical) house on fire :)