PT3.S4.Q11- Nature constantly adjusts the atmospheric...

zugamazt285

How is E correct? It appears to be supporting the conclusion not weakening it. My understanding of the argument's Conclusion is that it's telling environmentalists to relax because nature is going to adjust itself to the rising levels of the atmosphere.

E (if I'm understanding correctly) states that the Earth's natural adjustment process, which happens over the course of a million years, allows for the atmosphere to successfully cope with large short term variances in the carbon level.

How is this weakening? I leaned toward C initially because if carbon was just one piece of the atmospheric "blanket", then nature fixing just carbon wouldn't be enough to prevent the environment from getting dangerously hot.

cklomoooooo-1

Conclusion: environmentalists should relax about the sustain increase would threaten human life
Why? because nature will adjust the carbon level.

Flaw/assumption: well, what if nature adjust at certain rate? only part of it being adjusted?

A) is irrelevant
eliminate, it goes after the premise
C) Eliminate, it doesn't really weaken. even taken what you said it is part of the blanket do you know it plays an important or less important role?
D) Eliminate, it still doesn't address whether nature will do the job
E) it matched my expected flaw: If E is true, then nature don't adjust all of the released carbon.

cklomoooooo-1

For some reason,,, the letter B becomes an emoji when posted....
Anyways, hope it helps.> @cklomoooooo said:

Conclusion: environmentalists should relax about the sustain increase would threaten human life
Why? because nature will adjust the carbon level.

Flaw/assumption: well, what if nature adjust at certain rate? only part of it being adjusted?

A) is irrelevant
eliminate, it goes after the premise
C) Eliminate, it doesn't really weaken. even taken what you said it is part of the blanket do you know it plays an important or less important role?
D) Eliminate, it still doesn't address whether nature will do the job
E) it matched my expected flaw: If E is true, then nature don't adjust all of the released carbon.

letsgo1st

are there any other explanations for this question? bump #help

MindtheGAAP28

To me, E says that okay the natural adjustment process allows for wide fluctuations in the short term. For example sake, let's say the natural adjustment process allows for fluctuations from -100 to 100 quantity of carbon level. While the normal level is at 0 and anything above 50 is harmful to humans. So answer choice E gives us the possibility that carbon could go up way up to 95 quantity of carbon, which would be harmful and could threaten human life.

If we said the opposite of E, which is that the adjustment process does not allow for wide fluctuations in the short-term this would strengthen the argument. So if the adjustment process only allowed for fluctuations from -20 to 20, then the argument that the environmentalist should relax is strengthened.

@letsgo1st - hope this helps!