|
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
I JUST got here.
![]() Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 25
![]() |
B...
To reduce the infection in ticks...we must either increase the population of "other species" or decrease the population of white-footed infected mice. The argument says that if we increase the number of other species then we can control the number of infected ticks because the heathy source of food (i.e the other species) will increase.There can also be another way of reducing the infection in ticks,by decreasing the number of white-footed mice.If some other animal preys on these white footed mice....then their population will decrese. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 (permalink) | |
|
650 and aiming higher
![]() ![]() Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lowell,MA,USA
Posts: 349
![]() |
Quote:
Your explanation seems to be that for C and not B.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 (permalink) |
|
I JUST got here.
![]() Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 29
![]() |
D.
Simply because the size of the population of the deer ticks is not the issue here, their infection is. The argument says "Generally, the deer tick picks up the infection in the larval stage" it doesn't say that it picks up the infection ONLY in the larval stage. So, to evaluate the argument as valid, we have to explain the other causes of infection. Besides, the argument does say that the larve eats the mice and dies, so the population will thrive even if it only fed on the mice. It is not limited by non availability of "other" species. Hence B is false. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Contact TestMagic TestMagic Forums Archive Privacy Statement
TestMagic Locations
Legal
Privacy
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
Copyright © 2009 TestMagic
Ad Management by RedTyger