Critical Reasoning

Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. Nevertheless, some indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere. After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.

In the astronomer’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.
B. The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim.
C. The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
E. The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.

(C)

Would you please break down the reasoning behind your answer. You are not helping anyone by just writing down the answer. You might as well guess a random answer and post it.

..

Conclusion:it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.

First boldface explanation tells about presence of sulfur and the second boldface explanation tells about the reason ( rupture of sulfur cloud by fragments of comet). The two b/f act as premises for the given conclusion.

Option C says that clearly.

Bidisha800 wrote:

leswm wrote:Would you please break down the reasoning behind your answer. You are not helping anyone by just writing down the answer. You might as well guess a random answer and post it.

The ASSUMPTION of your argument is I should come here only to help others. If you negate this assumption, your argument falls apart.

This also strengthens the conclusion that:

You can never straighten a dogs tail, no matter what you do it'll always remain twisted!!!

'kutte ki dum kabhi seedhi nahin hoti...tedi-ki-tedi hi rehti hain '

Post removed.

I think it's C. Am I right?

C seems to be the best choice