- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 608
- Joined: Feb 06, 2024
- Wed Aug 13, 2025 4:54 pm
#113971
Hey Miriam,
Looking at these assumptions:
For #1, the stimulus says farmers in a certain area have abandoned green-manure planting. When the test speaks generally like this "farmers in an area have..." they generally mean 'all' or 'most.'. Perhaps not every single farmer has abandoned the practice, but it is mostly eliminated so as to have ruined the soil stability. So in order to reverse this damage, it makes sense that "many" if not "all" of the farmers will have to reverse course and resume planting green crops.
Hope that helps!
Looking at these assumptions:
miriamson07 wrote:1) Few farmers using green-manure crops would not be enough to rejuvenate the soil (meaning that we don't necessarily need MANY farmers to grow green-manure crops)#2 is explicitly supported by the stimulus - it says that "as a result" of abandoning green-manure crops, the soil structure is weak. That's establishing a cause and effect relationship.
2) Green-manure crops are necessary for soil structure to be significantly improved
For #1, the stimulus says farmers in a certain area have abandoned green-manure planting. When the test speaks generally like this "farmers in an area have..." they generally mean 'all' or 'most.'. Perhaps not every single farmer has abandoned the practice, but it is mostly eliminated so as to have ruined the soil stability. So in order to reverse this damage, it makes sense that "many" if not "all" of the farmers will have to reverse course and resume planting green crops.
Hope that helps!