The passage tells us: P: Experts say exercise is the most effective way to achieve physical fitness. P: Adults who eat cereal every day exercise more regularly than adults who do not eat cereal. C: Eating cereal every morning will put you on the path to achieving physical fitness.
This logic is flawed. We are already told that exercise leads to fitness. So, in adults who both exercise and eat cereal, how can we assume that the cereal is what causes the fitness? We can't assume causation based only off correlation, which is the case here. Let's keep this in mind while looking at our answer choices.
(A) "infers a cause from a mere correlation"
This means that cereal is correlated with exercise and physical fitness, but that cereal does not cause exercise or physical fitness. This is correct, as discussed above.
(C) "infers that a given factor is the sole predictor of a result merely on the grounds that the factor has been shown to contribute to that result"
Cereal is not necessarily shown to "contribute" to exercise/fitness, it is just shown to be correlated. Moreover, exercise is said to be "the most effective way" to achieve fitness, but not the only way to do so. Therefore, this answer choice is inapplicable and incorrect.
Does that make sense? Please let us know if you have any other questions and best of luck with your studies!
