The argument that uses a non sequitur fallacy is C, "Regulations on motorists should be lifted because factories are a bigger source of pollution"
Explanation: Non sequitur fallacy is when the conclusion doesn't follow the premises. That said in different words, the premises is an irrelevant reason to support the conclusion.
So, as true as it is that factories are a bigger source of pollution, the conclusion does not follow from the premises. The fact that regulations on motorists should be lifted, does not necessarily mean that the reason to do that is that factories are a bigger source of pollution.
Answer:
C. To find out if the call of an animal is missing
Explanation:
The more scientists listen to these kinds of recordings, the more they notice when an expected call is missing.
I hope this helps you in any shape or form.
Answer:
II. Spiders are powerless should a rock fall on them.
Edwards uses this comparison of non-believers to a spider to show that should God decide to send someone to hell, he or she does not have the power to stop it. Even if the non-believer felt assured and arrogant about it, he would still not have the ability to keep himself out of Hell. Option I is incorrect because Puritans, like Edwards, did not believe that any of God's creations were a mistake. Option III is also incorrect because the purpose is not to show the expendable nature of the spider, but rather the almighty power of God.
Explanation:
i hope it helps
stan Ateez