#24 - Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[lemonade42]

I understand the importance of "sometimes there is no more effective means of controlling agricultural pests than giving free rein to its natural predators". However, doesn't "sometimes" give a vague percentage of instances? For example, couldn't it refer to <50% of times or >50% of times? So that's why I keep on hesitating on the idea that the author would rather use predators than pesticides. So that's why I hesitated on eliminating (D). Can you explain what I'm doing/thinking wrong and explain why (D) is wrong in more detail?

Thank you!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi lemonade42!

This question asks us for a statement with which the author of the passage would most likely agree. Answer choice (D) states, "If an insecticide can effectively control pest populations as well as predator populations, then it should be used instead of predators to control pest populations."

I'm not seeing anywhere in the passage where the author endorses use of insecticides. Pesticides aren't discussed at all in the first two paragraphs. They are discussed in the third and fourth paragraphs, but in neither case is the author endorsing use of pesticides over use of predators. So the passage does include the author suggesting that use of natural predators may be warranted (as with the first lines of the passage that you quoted), but it doesn't include the author specifically endorsing pesticides, and definitely doesn't include the author endorsing use of pesticides over using natural predators.

[Dancingbambarina]

I got the first line of the passage to mean the reverse of what the forum is saying. How do I not make this mistake again?

My reasoning:

Normally, I would say that "sometimes it's better to go to the post office instead of waiting for mail online."
I would be meaning that the modus operandum would be to receive mail online, NOT actually go to the post office.

"SOMETIMES" would be denoting the exception.

Deeply confused. Thank you again.

[Dancingbambarina]

If anything, would the contrapositive of C fit in better with the aformentioned logic - if the use of sometimes does indeed denote an exception?

Thank you again

[Dana D]

Hey Dancing,

Your reading of the first sentence is correct - the author is saying that although our default might be to use pesticides, sometimes natural predators are a better alternative. The author is most likely to support answer choice (C) based on their reasoning around line (50) - pesticides can cause more harm than good, while natural predators are a great alternative to control pests. Since the author is advocating for this practice, it makes sense that they would think the default pest control method should be natural predators, and we use pesticides only if that route doesn't work.