Question

A growing number of ecologists have begun to recommend lifting the ban on the hunting of leopards, which are not an endangered species, and on the international trade of leopard's skin. Why, then, do I continue to support the protection of leopards?
For the same reason, I oppose the hunting of people. Admittedly, there are far too many human beings on this planet to qualify us for inclusion on the list of endangered species. Still, I doubt the same ecologists endorsing the resumption of leopard hunting would use that fact to recommend the hunting of human beings.

Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the author's argument?

Options

• Human being might, in fact, be placed on the list of endangered species

• Despite the growing number of ecologists supporting a repeal of the ban on leopard hunting, most will still support it

• The international ban on leopard hunting was instituted before leopards became an endangered species

• Leopards, now dangerously overpopulated, cannot be supported by their ecosystems

Answer 1

Leopards, now dangerously overpopulated, cannot be supported by their ecosystems

Explanation:

Statement (Leopards, now dangerously overpopulated, cannot be supported by their ecosystems) would most weaken the author's argument.