Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumWeaken

Agricultural researcher: A recent survey of farms in the drought-stricken Oakhaven region found that farms utilizing the newly developed MicroDrip irrigation system experienced, on average, a 25 percent lower rate of crop failure than farms using traditional overhead sprinklers. Since both systems draw water from the same dwindling regional reservoir, it is clear that the MicroDrip system delivers water to plant roots more efficiently than overhead sprinklers do.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the agricultural researcher's argument?

  1. Due to its specific tubing configuration, the MicroDrip system is predominantly utilized for deep-rooted crops, which are inherently more resilient to extended drought.Answer
  2. B
    In hot and windy environments, traditional overhead sprinklers lose a substantial portion of their water volume to evaporation before the water can penetrate the soil.
  3. C
    Farms in the Oakhaven region that use the MicroDrip system actually draw their water from private underground wells rather than from the regional reservoir.
  4. D
    The total number of farms in the Oakhaven region utilizing traditional overhead sprinklers is significantly larger than the number of farms utilizing the MicroDrip system.
  5. E
    The initial installation and ongoing maintenance costs of the MicroDrip system are substantially higher than those associated with traditional overhead sprinklers.

Answer

The statement indicating that the MicroDrip system is predominantly used for deep-rooted crops, which are naturally more resilient to drought.
This choice introduces a viable alternative explanation for the lower rate of crop failure. If the farms using the MicroDrip system are primarily growing crops that are inherently more resilient to drought, then the lower failure rate is likely due to the natural hardiness of those crops rather than the efficiency of the water delivery system. By providing an alternative cause for the correlation, this option severely undermines the researcher's conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The MicroDrip system delivers water to plant roots more efficiently than overhead sprinklers do.
This is the primary claim the researcher is attempting to prove based on the survey data.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
MicroDrip users have a 25 percent lower rate of crop failure, and both systems use water from the same reservoir.
These facts serve as the foundational evidence for the researcher's causal claim.
3
Spot the logical gap or flaw in the reasoning.
The argument assumes that the only possible reason for the lower crop failure rate is the irrigation system's efficiency, ignoring other potential variables.
A correlation (using MicroDrip and having lower crop failure) does not definitively prove causation, as there could be an alternative cause.
4
Select the option that exploits this logical gap.
The option stating that MicroDrip is used for deep-rooted, naturally drought-resilient crops weakens the argument.
It provides a highly viable alternative explanation for the lower crop failure rate, thereby severing the assumed causal link to the irrigation system's efficiency.

Key Concept

Alternative Causation and Correlational Flaws
Rate this question

Topics

Weaken

More questions from this topic