After studying the Earth's climate changes and the 10-year cycle of solar flares for 30 years, researchers have discovered that increased solar flare activity often precedes changes in ocean currents that influence global climate. This suggests that climatologists could enhance their climate predictions using this data.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument above?

Answer Choices

Correct answer marked below

A) Climatologists have access to more advanced technology today than they did 30 years ago.

B) Researchers can prove that solar flare activity has a direct impact on global climate.

C) Other factors besides solar flare activity have historically allowed climatologists to predict climate changes that are associated with solar flare activity.

Correct

D) Researchers have not yet figured out why solar flare activity follows a 10-year cycle.

E) It has been shown that changes in ocean currents lead to predictable climate variations.

See the full step-by-step explanation

You can see the correct answer above. Sign in for free to unlock the complete worked solution.

Track your performance and improve

Get detailed analytics, unlock full explanations, and move up difficulty tiers as you practice.

Start for free Sign in

Explanation

Preview

Official Explanation

Official

The argument suggests that increased solar flare activity can help improve climate predictions. To weaken this argument, we need evidence that shows other factors can also predict climate changes, which would make the reliance on solar flare activity less significant. Option C states that other factors besides solar flare activity have…

Read the full explanation

Create free account Sign in

Comments

ThitipongFeb 24, 2025

Can you explain more?

motaaMar 20, 2025

thankss

KrishMay 25, 2024

still struggling with these types of problems

pranavFeb 17, 2024

thankss

What this question tests

What it tests

Whether you can identify the option that most undermines an argument's conclusion.

Common trap

Choosing an irrelevant objection or one that attacks the premise rather than the reasoning.