ankujgupta
I am confused between A and C. Isn't both assumptions in this question. And why C is better that A ?
Try to break the argument down -
Premise 1 -
Biologists don't live long enough --> Hence, cannot study the life cycle of single redwood tree.Premise 2 -
they can study other redwood trees at different stages --> Hence, they can piece together the life cycle of a redwood tree.this line of reasoning is then paralleled in the case of globular clusters.
Premise 3 -
Astronomers don't live long enough --> hence, cannot study the life cycle of a single cluster. conclusion -
they can piece together the life cycle of a globular cluster.Obviously, what is the missing piece here? It is the assumption/premise that they can study other clusters at different stages of their life cycle.
the only option that does this is option C.
Option A - not necessarily true.
the passage talks about ONLY two fields - biology and astronomy. We have no idea whether this principle is true between other fields.
Also, the paragraph in the question talks about ONLY one method - observation of similar things. We do not know whether other methods carry over as well.
Moreover, the "principles" are the same, not necessarily the "methods" used.
Option B - incorrect.
We have no idea whether such observations have "little value".
Option C - correct answer.
If such clusters are NOT available, then we cannot apply the same principle. i.e. we cannot infer about one cluster based on the observations of other such clusters.
Option D - incorrect.
We have no data about this.
Option E - incorrect.
We have no data about this.