Studies indicate that the rate

Answer choices

1. A

   No Impact5% picked this

   some types of water pollution have no noticeable effect on organisms that

   We're trying to argue that the water pollution problem will become more serious, and this answer is talking about pollution being harmless to organisms. So this seems to be going the opposite direction of what we want.

   5%
2. B

   Strengthens5% picked this

   the types of water pollution caused this year are less dangerous than those

   If this answer had said that this year's pollution was more dangerous than last year's, it would weaken. We could argue, "Author, even though it's the same amount of pollution each year, the toxicity of the pollution is getting worse each year, and so the water pollution problem will be getting more serious." But if we're told that this year's pollution is equally or less dangerous than last year's, it strengthens.

   5%
3. C

   Attacks the Trigger15% picked this

   the leveling-off trend of water pollution will

   This does not disagree with the author, because the author never said or implied that the leveling-off trend would continue. She just said, "if this trend continues". I can say, "If a dog were elected president, the partisan media would still find ways to politicize the dog's actions." That doesn't mean I think a dog will be elected president. You can only argue with me by contesting the 2nd half. You'd have to say, "Not so -- in this hypothetical world of President Pups, the media would find it so adorable that it would unify our partisan divides." When an argument has a conditional conclusion, we can never strengthen the argument by making the trigger sound more likely nor can we weaken the argument by making the trigger sound less likely. We accept the trigger. It's like one more premise, one more background constraint.

   15%
4. D

   Out of Scope: air / soil1% picked this

   air and soil pollution are becoming

   This conclusion is only about water pollution.

   1%
5. E

   Correct74% picked this

   the effects of water pollution are

   Why this is right

   This allows us to say that even though we're adding the same amount of pollution each year, the pollution problem will be getting more serious. Can you say to your friends, "Relax, I'm not getting any more drunk. I had as many shots last hour as I had the previous hour. So if this trend of three shots per hour continues, then my drunkeness will not get any more serious"? Of course not, because all that alcohol adds up; it's cumulative. Yes, your liver will eventually process the alcohol away (much like ecological habitats can slowly detoxify over time). But if you're already at a problematic state (if you're already drunk / if you already have a water pollution problem), and you keep adding more to the problem, you're making the problem worse.

   Skill tested: Weaken · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   74%