Answer must be (A) for the highlighted errors in other options....

(B) Suggests Inactivity of the mineral , which is out of context.
(C) Spreading of minerals , not relevant and useful under the current context.
(D) Releasing toxins (Some variety) restricts the cope..
(E) Damaging fish population is out of scope..
_________________

aaba, Can you tell the code of gmac paper test of this question.
_________________

This is straight A, let us take a look at the options:

B - weakens by stating that chalcedony stays inactive for 5 years i.e. it does not prevent the release of harmful chemicals for this period. We are looking for a choice that lends more credence to the fact that spreading chalcedony in that area would save the workers there.

C - if anything this weakens the conclusion by stating that chalcedony takes more time to spread and hence be effective.

D - this clearly weakens by stating that it does not prevent a few chalcedony varieties from releasing toxins hence workers could still be afflicted.

E - states a negative aspect of chalcedony but we are looking for an answer choice that would compel us to use chalcedony in that area.

A - is the answer as it strengthens the conclusion by strengthening the assumption that the author.

Conclusion: spreading chalcedony in the Redstone Mine in order to preserve the surviving workers will be successful. We need find an strengthner.

Need to keep a note here that the argument is talking about surviving members. This means chalcedony must be spread after the leak is done.
This means we need to find an answer which is very effective to contain the disaster but ineffective to prevent it from happening.

Let's look at the options.

A: contender. strong indeed
B: contender. weak one because It will still have issues after 5 years
C: irrelevant
D: contender. weak one because it is not applicable in all cases
E: irrelevant

IMO A is a great choice to go with.

The answer could be arrived at through more flexible approach. Cause(introducing chalcedony) ->effect(reducing mercury leak)
Answer choice A strengthens the view that indeed cause causes effect

I am not able to decipher the argument at all.
Does it mean Chalcedony needs to be sprinkled like pesticide. Could you please take up this one ? VeritasKarishma
_________________

I still can't understand how A is correct.

The argument says Chalcedony needs to be spread to stop bioaccumulation. If Chalcedony already occurs near cinnabar ore , what is the need to spread it anyways , it should arrest bioaccumulation by default right?

Option C makes more sense to me because is gives a reason why Chalcedony needs to be spread..

what am i missing here?

What is the source of this CR? Doesn't look like an official question. The options are somewhat ambiguous and not easy to comprehend.

Premises:

- Toxins from unrefined cinnabar ore presently afflict 7 of every 10 workers in the Redstone Mine.
- A second mineral which occurs in the same environment, chalcedony, restricts the release of toxins from cinnabar ore.

Mining chemists suggest spreading chalcedony in the Redstone Mine in order to preserve the surviving workers.

We need to say that the suggestion will be successful - so spreading chalcedony will preserve the surviving workers.

A It accumulates in deposits which are concentrated in the mineral veins where cinnabar is found.

This tells us that if we spread chalcedony, it will accumulate in places where cinnabar is found. Well, then it makes it likely that it will be able to stop the toxins from releasing from cinnabar.

Another interpretation could be that it is already found concentrated in places where cinnabar is found. Then how will spreading help and hence the confusion. But since no other option helps, we should take the previous interpretation.

B It can on some occasions stay inactive in mineral veins for almost five years before it begins to spread.

Irrelevant. We are planning on spreading it ourselves. What it does normally we don't care.

C It spreads through an environment more gradually than does cinnabar in most geological settings.

The point is, if we spread it, will it preserve the health of workers? What it normally does is irrelevant.

D It does not prevent a few common varieties of cinnabar ore from releasing toxins.

This weakens our suggestion.

E It can occasionally damage fish populations by poisoning their gills.

Irrelevant.

Answer (A)
_________________