Bunuel
Seemingly inconsequential changes in sea temperature due to global warming eventually result in declines in fish and seabird populations. A rise of just two degrees prevents the vertical mixing of seawater from different strata. This restricts the availability of upwelling nutrients to phytoplankton. Since zooplankton, which feed upon phytoplankton, feed the rest of the food chain, the declines are inevitable.
The boldface portion plays which one of the following roles in the argument?
A. It is a hypothesis supported by the fact that phytoplankton feed on upwelling nutrients.
B. It is intended to provide an example of the ways in which the vertical mixing of seawater affects feeding habits.
C. It helps show how global temperature changes affect larger sea animals directly.
D. It is offered as one reason that global warming must be curtailed.
E. It is offered in support of the idea that global warming poses a threat to all organisms.
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
The argument is structured as follows:
Premise: A rise of just two degrees prevents the vertical mixing of seawater from different strata.
Premise: This restricts the availability of upwelling nutrients to phytoplankton.
Premise: Zooplankton, which feed upon phytoplankton, feed the rest of the food chain.
Conclusion: Seemingly inconsequential changes in sea temperature due to global warming eventually result in declines in fish and seabird populations. The conclusion in the first line is echoed again in the final sentence. The argument part referenced in the question stem is a premise (note the use of the premise indicator “since” in the last line), and your answer must indicate that the role played by the argument part is that of a premise.
Answer choice (A): The portion referenced in the question stem is not a hypothesis, but rather a statement of fact.
Answer choice (B): The statement referenced in the question stem is not an example of the way the mixing of seawater affects feeding habits, but rather another premise that is then combined with the vertical mixing premise to help support the conclusion.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer. The phrase “it helps show” describes a premise, and in this case the premise is used to support a statement about the effect of temperature changes on fish and seabirds.
Answer choice (D): The argument does not take a position that global warming should be curtailed. Instead, the argument shows how small changes in sea temperature lead to population declines, and no opinion of those effects is stated.
Answer choice (E): This is an Exaggerated Answer. The argument specifically indicates that fish and seabirds populations will decline. This answer choices states that all organisms are threatened.
I am confused between Options C & E.
While I understand the explanation above, I do have some points to add here.
and in some way is limiting the domain of the option here. Also , how does one define the word
The argument does talk about "rest of the food chain". Can I not infer from this that the "rest of the food chain" is talking about all organisms. Infact, it is possible that there are other animals which feed on fish and seabirds and so on.
I think neither of the options are completely correct here. Other views are welcome.