Examkin

Question

Difficulty: EasyEvaluating Passage Arguments and Claims

Consider the following passage:

Recent environmental studies indicate that restored coastal mangrove forests absorb carbon dioxide per acre at a rate up to four times higher than mature tropical rainforests. Consequently, several climate action groups argue that redirecting all international forestry conservation funds exclusively to coastal mangrove restoration is the single most effective global strategy for rapid atmospheric carbon reduction. However, marine biologists note that mangroves require strict salinity and tidal conditions, restricting their maximum global viable surface area to less than 5 percent of the area suitable for terrestrial forests.

Statement: The marine biologists' observation regarding geographical surface area constraints directly weakens the climate action groups' argument for redirecting all conservation funding exclusively to mangroves.

Answer: Answer

Answer

The statement is True.
The proposal claims that allocating all funding to mangroves is the single most effective global strategy. The evidence regarding surface area limitations proves that mangroves can only address a tiny fraction of global forest capacity. Demonstrating this physical constraint directly exposes a weakness in the argument for exclusive funding.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the central argument and proposal of the climate action groups.
The climate groups advocate allocating all international conservation funds exclusively to mangrove restoration based on superior per-acre absorption rates.
To evaluate whether a statement weakens an argument, the core premise and conclusion of that argument must be clearly defined.
2
Analyze the counter-evidence provided by the marine biologists.
Biologists establish that suitable mangrove habitat accounts for less than 5 percent of total potential forest land globally.
This factual constraint establishes an absolute ceiling on the global volume of carbon mangroves can capture.
3
Determine how the counter-evidence affects the validity of the central argument.
Since exclusive funding to mangroves ignores the remaining 95 percent of viable land area, the strategy fails to maximize global carbon reduction. Exposing this flaw weakens the claim that an exclusive mangrove strategy is the most effective approach.
Evidence that reveals a fatal bottleneck in a proposed strategy logically weakens claims advocating for that strategy's exclusive adoption.

Key Concept

Evaluating Passage Arguments and Claims
Rate this question

Topics

Evaluating Passage Arguments and Claims

More questions from this topic