- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Jan 09, 2019
The error behind C is one that actually shows up a decent amount in incorrect answers, so I want to help clear it up.
The author is arguing that by reducing the amount of vehicles used (replaced by people walking in lieu of driving) would lead to a reduction in the amount of pollution.
C tells us that certain cars pollute more than others (which is reasonable considering SUVs versus hybrids, for example), but knowing that cars are on a scale for pollution does not help us to strengthen the argument that removing the use of cars will help with the reduction of pollution.
Maybe, all the people who decide to ditch their cars and walk to work or social events are the people who owned cars that were relatively good on the pollution scale. This idea could even weaken the argument, as the pollution decrease wouldn't be as great if it was only the Prius users who were giving up the use of their cars.
Without knowing which cars (and where they are on the pollution spectrum) are being skipped in favor of walking, this information becomes fairly irrelevant in helping to argue that in general, less use of cars will lead to less pollution.
In a similar situation, there was a strengthen question years ago that had something to do with a a special diet that allegedly led to making people healthier. Does knowing that some users of the diet had increases in health that were significantly different than others help to argue that the diet was actually causing increased health? It doesn't, much in the same way as answer choice C in this question.
Hope that helps!