I am not at the level where I can map out the causal claims for each question and answer the question in target timing. I feel like this question didn't even need to be mapped out, but I can't tell if I should start mapping out questions or if mapping them out will mostly be a waste of time.

Hey, I'm not so far into the weakening questions lessons but here's what I've gathered so far!

-assumes (without warrant) - includes not within answer

-presumes (without justification) - includes not within answer

-fails to consider

-neglects (to take into account the possibility)

these four stems should be the basis of the rewording

could I have eliminated A because the word "affects" does not translate to a negative or positive effect? Or is that just an entirely wrong use of the word affect (effect vs. affect)? Or is it just because the causal claim flows backwards? Now I just feel like im confusing myself lol #help

the stimulus never shows that preserving living organisms is IMPORTANT to us so why is the answer choice correct if its adding this new information

I don't understand why B is the correct answer because doesnt the answer contradict the evidence in the premise? B says the two forms are concentrated equally while the premise says they are not concentrated equally