Quote:
After observing the Earth’s weather patterns and the 11-year sunspot cycle of the Sun for 36 years, scientists have found that high levels of sunspot activity precede shifts in wind patterns that affect the Earth’s weather. One can conclude that meteorologists will be able to improve their weather forecasts based on this information.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
Conclusion: Meteorologists will be able to improve their weather forecasts based on weather patterns and the 11-year sunspot cycle of the Sun.
Quote:
(A) Weather forecasts are more detailed today than they were 36 years ago.
Out of scope. Nothing about improvement of weather forecasts.
Quote:
(B) Scientists can establish that sunspot activity directly affects the Earth’s weather.
Scientist's establishment does not matter. Out of scope.
Quote:
(C) Evidence other than sunspot activity has previously enabled meteorologists to forecast the weather conditions that are predictable on the basis of sunspot activity.
This is directly countering the conclusion. Correct.
Quote:
(D) Scientists have not determined why the sunspot activity on the Sun follows an 11-year cycle.
Reason for sun's 11-year cycle is immaterial.
Quote:
(E) It has been established that predictable wind patterns yield predictable weather patterns.
This options gives no relation between weather forecasts and wind patterns/Sun cycles.