Linda says that, as a scientist, she knows that no scientist appreciates poetry. And, since most scientists are logic...

Hi, I dismissed B as a correct answer due to the wording of children v "not adults". My understanding was that answer B conflated someone as being a child, instead of not an adult, where the two terms are never compared in the text. I deemed it out of scope as a child's desires are never discussed. The video claims that "we know if you're a child, you're not an adult."Right from the outset it seemed to me that drawing on external knowledge of children v adults was improper. But even if that were appropriate, the video then argues "not-adult" MUST be a child. Just because someone is not an adult, there is nothing requiring them to be children. Child ----> Not Adult This is the assumption the video makes, which you teach as wrong since it is a fact that never appears in the stimulus, nor is it a deduction since children are never mentioned. But even if this were in the stimulus, the video then confuses the contrapositive by saying: Not Adult -----> Child (incorrect, since is would be Adult ---> Not Child) Am I misunderstanding the video, or is there another reason B would be incorrect? PS: My issue was not that I thought other answers were right, I simply eliminated all answers as wrong, including B, and was left with nothing.