LordStark
It is crucially important to farmers that the herbicides they use to control weeds not damage their crops. One very effective herbicide is safe for corn but lethal to soybeans. To maintain the nutrients in the soil, soybeans and corn are frequently sown in a field in alternate years. Therefore, in such fields, the herbicide can safely be used on the corn, since the two crops are not sown together in the same field.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(a) The herbicide has not been shown to harm insects, birds, or other animals that come in contact with it.
(b) Scientists have so far failed in their attempts to breed soybeans that are resistant to the herbicide.
(c) Some of the herbicide persists as a residue in the soil for over a year.
(d) To be effective, the herbicide must be applied early in the growing season of the corn.
(e) Soybean crops do not require the application of herbicides to the same extent as do corn crops.
Premise :- soybeans and corn are frequently sown in a field in alternate years.
Conclusion :- in such fields, the herbicide ( Which is lethal to soybeans ) can safely be used on the corn, since the two crops are not sown together in the same field.
To weaken this conclusion we need to show that " in such fields, the herbicide ( Which is lethal to soybeans ) can NOT safely be used on the corn, since the two crops are not sown together in the same field."
Option C does that job.
If some of the herbicide persists as a residue in the soil for over a year then it may kill soybean in the following year ( after the year when corn was sown). So in such fields, the herbicide ( Which is lethal to soybeans ) can NOT safely be used on the corn.
Please give me kudo s if you liked my explanation.