No flaw in the conditional logic. If all marsupials do not lay eggs, and at least some marsupials are native to Australia, then it follows that some animals native to Australia do not lay eggs.

This takes Franz’s opinion at face value just as the stimulus takes Linda’s. Further, it improperly negates a “most” statement. Even if Franz is right, we could only conclude that anyone who wants children to eat candy at bedtime is not a father. We can’t, however, conclude that those people are children.

Different flaw. This establishes that wine aged in metal is not equal to the best wood-aged wine, but this does not necessarily mean it’s inferior—it could be better. Further, (C) draws a conclusion about an entire group (California wine), whereas the stimulus arrives at a “some” statement.

No flaw in the conditional logic. If all color film produces image less sharp than the best black-and-white film, then it follows that at least some instant film must produce images less sharp than the best black-and-white film because at least some (most) instant film is in color.

Wrong flaw. It establishes that most corporate executives are honest, then draws a conclusion about other people who are also honest. It’s flawed because we don’t know anything about those who like to pay taxes. (E) doesn’t negate a “most” statement, whereas the stimulus does.