Leni: Colm has made extensive claims that the consumption of red meat

Can anyone explain why E is incorrect?

because no where in the argument this is done. has Leni ever attacked colm stating that he lacks judgement? the answer is NO

got it thanks

Hi guys,

I understand why the answer (a) is right, but I have problems to eliminate the answer (e).

I have read the statement and reasoned the answer in the following form:

Colm has made extensive claims that there is a causal relation between red meat and color cancer.
Leni affirms that strong correlation is not causal relation and that any self-respecting scientist knows it.
Therefore, Colm’s claims must be false.

Then

Since any good scientist must known the different between correlation and causal relation and Colm does not know, Colm is not a good scientist. If Colm is not a good scientist , then Colm’s claims must be false.

How can I avoid this mistake? Where am I screwing up everything?

Correlation does not prove causation but not excludes it

A

Using POE it is clearly A. All other choices are either OoS or extreme.

Stimulus: B; CP/C – Conclusion: Colm’s claims must be false (because correlation does not prove causation) – but just because no exact proof doesn’t necessarily dismiss there is causation entirely
A. This just sounds like a convoluted way of saying just because there’s no proof (i.e., failing to establish outright) no causation is not to succeed in disproving causation (i.e., doesn’t mean you necessarily show that causation doesn’t exist). This is exactly it.
Another example: “The white house has failed to offer any evidence that they reached a trade agreement w/ China. Therefore, no such agreement has been reached.” – I mean sure, it’s quite possible this is true. But the evidence does NOT undeniably prove that the agreement was never reached.
B. The reader’s own analysis isn’t in scope here. We’re focused on the error in reasoning. Providing data or NOT providing data doesn’t say anything about the error in reasoning.
C. This is what she is trying to refute. Not the error in reasoning.
D. This isn’t the error in reasoning of LENI. If anything, this is the error in reasoning of Colm. Wrong person. Lost in the sauce, if you chose this option.
E. This is like the source/authority argument reasoning error. However, this isn’t happening. Leni is saying correlation doesn’t cause causation. She’s not saying that the person is dumb or the credentials aren’t there or anything of that nature. It’s the argument that she’s attacking.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.