- Tue Nov 29, 2016 10:41 am
#31004
Hi, Studytime,
Let's make a quick rundown of the components of this argument and the task we're trying to accomplish:
P1: The more sunlight reflected back into space, the cooler the planet tends to become.
P2: Snow and ice reflect more sunlight into space than do ocean and land uncovered by snow.
C: The more surface covered by snow and ice, the cooler the atmosphere will become.
Task: Provide support for the claim that "The more surface covered by snow and ice, the cooler the atmosphere will become."
We already have some support as you noted. However, you must be careful on Strengthen questions to understand that your prediction (even if it's a great prediction!) will not always match up exactly with the credited response. There are often a couple different ways to accomplish this goal. As I noted in my post above, you could support the conclusion by providing new (and different) evidence that backs up the claim. You could also defend the validity of the conclusion by ruling out an unwanted possibility.
Let's consider the two answer choices that you've identified. Answer Choice (A) kinda takes you on a fun journey into a tangential consideration. So what if we need low temperatures to have clouds that generate snow? Does this bolster our point that "The more surface covered by snow and ice, the cooler the atmosphere will become"? No. While it may seem relevant, it does not address the central claim directly. Further, even if the "low atmospheric temperatures" were sufficient to know that more clouds would be formed leading to more snow, you would not really be addressing the gap between the premises and the conclusion. To make this information work for you, you'd have to introduce a rather circular assumption, that you will have the lower temperatures sufficient to generate more clouds to generate more snow.
Instead, you need to address this gap, which involves the other part of the equation that we thus far have not addressed, i.e. the effect of the rest of the non-snow/ice covered land on global atmosphere.
Consider for instance: what if non-snow/ice covered land has some other method of cooling the planet even more than by reflecting sunlight back into space? What would the effect on the conclusion be then? It would be a dramatically weaker conclusion, even given the truth of the premises provided.
Answer Choice (C) addresses this gap by stating that this non-snow/ice covered land in fact exacerbate a warming atmosphere, giving strong new support for the claim that "The more surface covered by snow and ice, the cooler the atmosphere will become" because clearly with less surface covered by snow and ice, you will not only experience less cooling from less snow/ice but also more warming from the rest of the land/ocean area.