Read question first and found in the stimulus where that exact phrase was used

Looking to stimulus I analyzed the structure as a two part argument. The subsidiary conclusion being the warm sea under the service supported by the photographs/buckling and the main conclusion being that their may be life on Europa supported by the warm sea sub conclusion

Now looking to the answer choices:

I picked A as it follows exactly my outline I have made above.

B I felt was incorrect because I thought that everything leads to the author talking about life on this moon. It funnels into this conclusion much more than the idea of warm seas. Warm seas is also the only direct support for the idea of life. The photographs and topography support the warm sea conclusion more and thus indirectly supports the main conclusion.

C: Completely incorrect. There is no counterpoint in this stimulus

D: When I saw the word "ONLY" immediately crossed out this answer. As stated before there is indirect support from the photograph

E: I think this could get some folk. The highlighted phrase is support for the "MAIN" conclusion imo.

First I looked to the question itself. The question asks us to look for something that is most similar to the conclusion. So now I'm focused on finding the conclusion less so concerned about details of the support, etc.

I determined the conclusion to be:

But not all efforts to increase productivity are beneficial to the business as a whole.

The argument follows a, context, counter conclusion, support format. Looking at the word "but" i believed the conclusion would follow as the next claim would refute the big idea that preceded it. To give further support to my picking of this to be the conclusion I looked to the following sentences and deemed these to be reasons WHY not all efforts to increase productivity are good. Perhaps I need to understand better the support links to the conclusion here.

Looking to my answer choices I now know I am looking for some phrase that is similar to "But not all efforts to increase productivity are beneficial to the business as a whole."

A: talks about actions in general not actions concerning productivity. Too broad

B: This was my answer. Almost verbatim the conclusion above. Some is analogous to but not all, measures to efforts, and then literally the rest of the sentence is the same lol.

C: Completely off base. No where did we discuss employee/owner roles

D: Perhaps if you thought the first sentence was the conclusion this could be correct. But the first sentence is context/counter information

E: I could see this being the next most popular answer. If you thought the final idea was the conclusion this is most similar to that. However, employee security is very clearly not the main idea of this passage. With every sentence centered around the idea of productivity it was clear to me that the author is more concerned with these measures effects on business and less on employee feelings.

Can you have the "some people say" position start the phrase and immediately state something antithetical to that without the use of a trigger word? Does that weaken the argument? If someone has a drill question that exemplifies this phrasing please share!! :)

On question 5 I immediately noted the temporal use of the word "since".

However, I overcomplicated the premise conclusion structure.

I thought that the conclusion was as simple as "there has been a surge in obesity rates". Clear and not really dependent on the 1980's.

Then I thought that the obesity rate surge could be explained and supported by the physical activity and dietary habits.

Honestly even saying this out loud now. I kinda believe it LOL.

I think the Disney argument is the strongest bc it has clear definitions. Each term is finite in the way it is valued in the argument scheme. Members have fast pass. Pass has pre requisites.

Tiger argument is weak in the fact that tigers "can" cause serious injury. They may not definitely cause that injury. However, the conclusion is also not a strong claim either so the premise is analogous to its conclusion

Trash bin is the weakest bc the subjects, fat cat and food, have no real link with each other in the passage. They were merely in the same vicinity. To reiterate my previous point, the definitions of each subject are unclear. Does Mr. Fat Cat only lick his paw after eating salmon? That would be stronger support. Do we even know if salmon is missing from the floor? There is no indication of the action of eating at all.