smartguy595
For hundreds of years, pearl divers have gathered pearls directly from mollusks on the sea floor. This is an extremely risky profession,
exposing the divers to risks of drowning, air embolism, and shark attacks. Still, as long as society demands authentic cultured pearls,
these brave divers must continue to risk their lives.
Which of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion above?
A. Shark attacks on pearl divers have decreased steadily over the last three decades because of declining shark populations.
B. Cultured pearls are generally considered more beautiful than those made by artificial means.
C. Robotic pearl harvesters can gather pearls faster and at less cost than human divers, although they may disturb aquatic
communities.
D. Part of the value of cultured pearls derives from the exotic way in which they are obtained.
E. With the proper equipment and training, a diver employing scuba gear can harvest three times as many pearls per hour as
can a free air diver.
Argument states that human divers' have to continue diving. To weaken we need to show either that human divers are not required.
Let us check options.
(A) If anything, this statement strengthens the argument. Divers can go on diving, because risk has reduced. Out.
(B) Again this statement strengthens the argument. Out
(C) This statement highlights another option, in place of human divers and showcases that it is faster and cheaper. Disturbance to aquatic communities is not an issue in argument. Hold.
(D) Again this statement strengthens the argument. Out
(E) Irrelevant. Issues is not to choose between a scuba diver or a free air diver.
(C) is the best option.