Because you started earlier
C. to <span>persuade the reader that by taking steps now they can help fight the damage done to earth's atmosphere.</span>
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.
Hi !!
Carl had eaten the last piece of cake
had eaten = past perfect (have -past- + past participle)
to eat is an irregular verb = eat //ate//eaten
simple past = ate
past progressive = was eating
present progressive = is eating
hope I helped !!
