The skeptic essentially says that odd behaviors in dogs are constantly happening and thus there is bound to be a case where that odd behavior occurs just before an earthquake. What needs to be clarified is what it means to behave oddly. If there is a specific odd behavior all dogs exhibit before an earthquake, then that would weaken the skeptics' claim. If there isn't a certain odd behavior and that behavior is simply any behavior that falls within the category of "odd," then that supports the skeptics' claim. That's exactly what E addresses. An evaluate answer choice should both weaken and strengthen the claim depending on which way you answer it. Also, this question does you a favor by making all the other answer choices so obviously irrelevant you can just eliminate your way down to E.
Comments
The skeptic essentially says that odd behaviors in dogs are constantly happening and thus there is bound to be a case where that odd behavior occurs just before an earthquake. What needs to be clarified is what it means to behave oddly. If there is a specific odd behavior all dogs exhibit before an earthquake, then that would weaken the skeptics' claim. If there isn't a certain odd behavior and that behavior is simply any behavior that falls within the category of "odd," then that supports the skeptics' claim. That's exactly what E addresses. An evaluate answer choice should both weaken and strengthen the claim depending on which way you answer it. Also, this question does you a favor by making all the other answer choices so obviously irrelevant you can just eliminate your way down to E.
thank you, I appreciate your help and explanation!