karthikpandian19 wrote:By the 1960s, film production had already evolved greatly to include many advanced techniques for photographic and video imaging. These techniques presented directors with a wide range of effects that could be used to create realistic and convincing scenes. Therefore, the first moon landing in 1969 was a fictitious event that was carefully produced in a film studio.

A major flaw in the argument above is that

factual information is used to support a statement that is not related to it in any way

an assumption is made regarding the political intentions of film producers during that time

it does not specify actual techniques or filming methods that could have enabled the production of the fictitious film

the author assumes the existence of a budget for the production of such a film

it claims that an event occurred in a certain way based solely upon the fact that it would be possible

I will go for E

user123321

OA is E

OA is E

This is an Argument Flaw question. You are required to locate the inherent flaw in the argument's conclusion or its underlying assumption. In this argument, sentences 1 and 2 are premises, citing facts. Sentence 3 is the argument's conclusion, as it uses the conclusion conjunction Therefore:Premise A: film production had become quite advanced by the 1960s
+
Premise B: the advancements enabled the creation of realistic and convincing scenes
≠
Conclusion: the 1969 moon landing was a fake, a film created realistically enough to be believed

A. In the argument, the factual information (premises) and the statement supported by them (conclusion) are definitely related. The are all concerned with filming during the 1960s. This answer choice does not expose the argument's flaw.

B. Although an assumption is made in this argument - and quite a big one, too - it is not about the political motives of those who allegedly created the fake film. Since the conclusion does not relate to political intentions, it cannot be argued that the assumption involves this subject.

C. Mentioning the actual techniques and methods is unnecessary in this argument, as the second premise tells us that the advancements in film-making technology were at a level that allowed directors to make believable films. Other than that fact, we do not need to know more details about the actual techniques.

D. Although the author relies on an assumption in this argument, the assumption has nothing to do with the budget of the film. Since the conclusion does not relate to this budget, it cannot be argued that the assumption involves this subject.

E. Precisely!The argument presents factual information (premises) to show that it would be possible to create a film that faked the first moon landing. However, the fact that it was possible does not necessarily mean that it was done.