Quote:
could you please explain why b is wrong. i choose b over a because imo the additional conclusion should be more towards the damages caused by the ban as it is something that should logically follow.
Aketa,
The passage states that, "Deer are {...} causing motor vehicle accidents that result in serious injury to motorists." The questions asks, "Which one of the following, if true, provides the strongest
additional support for the conclusion above?", and choice B doesn't give us any
additional support...
Quote:
(B) Motor vehicle accidents involving deer often result in damage to the vehicle, injury to the motorist, or both.
Even if this statement is true, it doesn't tell us anything about the number of motor vehicle accidents in Greenfield County. In other words, while it may be true that motor vehicle accidents involving deer often result in damage to the vehicle, injury to the motorist, or both, nothing in choice B tells us how often such accidents actually occur in Greenfield County, if at all. And even if such accidents do occur and, say 90% of those accidents result in damage to the vehicle, injury to the motorist, or both, it is possible that most of that 90% is comprised of accidents that only result in damage to the vehicle. Choice B only tell us that
some motor vehicle accidents involving deer result in injury to the motorist, but it gives us no idea of how often such injuries occur or of how serious those injuries are. The passage already states that deer are causing motor vehicles accidents that result in
serious injury to motorists; since choice B does not tell us anything about the frequency of such accidents and injuries in Greenfield County or the seriousness of those injuries, it does not provide any additional support.
Choice A, on the other hand, gives us additional information that strongly supports the conclusion. The argument is based on the assumption that the hunting ban caused the increase in the deer population, but it is certainly possible that other factors led to the increase. Choice A provides evidence that the ban was, in fact, the cause of the population increase, thus strengthening the argument.