Brett on September 9 at 05:51PM
I understand that the security guard may have a bias, but I am confused as why this is the predominate method of flawed logic in this question. When I read the question, the flawed logic seemed to be derived from the fact that the thieves lacked A and B (above or at ground level) to conclude C, below ground. This conclusion fails to factor in that maybe the thieves did not enter at all (E.g, someone working at the museum walked out with the paintings).
Using this, I read A, which I selected as correct. A implores the same flaw in logic, a lack of condition A and B (first in both accuracy and form) to conclude C (that a third condition must exist). This seems to be the same flaw as my original deviation from the question stem. Thanks!
Brett on September 9 at 05:58PM