My reasoning is because the claims in the the disney example directly brough us to the conclusion- great support. The Tiger was in the middle since yea it technically supported the claim it should have specified that people prefer pets that are not aggressive or cause injuries or the suitability for a pet. The trash bin was the weakest because all these things can be true and the cat still could not be the one who knocked it over- there was nothing incriminating and to make it stronger they should have leaned more into how the cat acts after eating salmon. Overall room for doubt determines the strength of an argument.

5/5 :)))

I unfortunately got tripped up with the quiz instructions and was suspicious of every question being an argument trap. Meaning its going to use the indicator words to trick me into thinking its an argument, but my mistake was trying to analyze the argument to identify one. Wrong pattern of thinking and it led to me being unnesccesarily confused and skeptical.