Critical Reasoning

Hi everyone -
Official guide - question 12
According to a prediction of the not-so-distant future published in 1940, electricity would revolutionize
agriculture. Electrodes would be inserted into the soil, and the current between them would kill bugs and weeds
and make crop plants stronger.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that the logic of the prediction above is flawed?
(A) In order for farmers to avoid electric shock while working in the fields, the current could be turned off at
such times without diminishing the intended effects.
(B) If the proposed plan for using electricity were put into practice, farmers would save on chemicals now
being added to the soil.
(C) It cannot be taken for granted that the use of electricity is always beneficial.
(D) Since weeds are plants, electricity would affect weeds in the same way as it would affect crop plants.
(E) Because a planting machine would need to avoid coming into contact with the electrodes, new parts for
planting machines would need to be designed.

Guide explains correct answer is D, which I also thought. But I eliminated D thinking that in the question itself it is clearly written that current from this machine would work on weeds and bug.
Aren't we suppose to consider the question statement as true?

Sorry - a correction - question 4.

sitar wrote:Hi everyone -
Official guide - question 12
According to a prediction of the not-so-distant future published in 1940, electricity would revolutionize
agriculture. Electrodes would be inserted into the soil, and the current between them would kill bugs and weeds
and make crop plants stronger.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that the logic of the prediction above is flawed?
(A) In order for farmers to avoid electric shock while working in the fields, the current could be turned off at
such times without diminishing the intended effects.
(B) If the proposed plan for using electricity were put into practice, farmers would save on chemicals now
being added to the soil.
(C) It cannot be taken for granted that the use of electricity is always beneficial.
(D) Since weeds are plants, electricity would affect weeds in the same way as it would affect crop plants.
(E) Because a planting machine would need to avoid coming into contact with the electrodes, new parts for
planting machines would need to be designed.

Guide explains correct answer is D, which I also thought. But I eliminated D thinking that in the question itself it is clearly written that current from this machine would work on weeds and bug.
Aren't we suppose to consider the question statement as true?

First, we have to accept any premise offered in an argument as fact, but clearly, we don't have to accept a conclusion (or prediction) as fact. (How could a prediction be a fact? And if it were a fact, how could we show it was flawed?) But even if we accept the claim that the current will kill the weeds and bugs as fact, D would still destroy the prediction that plants would become stronger, as the current would also kill the plants. So it clearly indicates a flaw in the logic of the argument.