Question

read the passage. (1) with time and effort, we can replace fossil fuels with alternative sources of energy. (2) alternative energy sources can help save the planet. (3) unfortunately, most people use fossil fuels in their daily lives, so they will continue to use them unnecessarily. (4) still, if enough citizens do their research and see the benefits of alternative energy, then we can turn the tide in our favor. (5) for example, using just 19 percent of unclaimed desert areas for solar installations could provide electricity for the entire nation. (6) if each individual who believes that alternative energy can make a difference takes a step away from fossil fuel use, then we can change the world. which sentences should be removed or revised to eliminate logical fallacies and improve clarity? select two options. sentence 1 sentence 2 sentence 3 sentence 4 sentence 5 sentence 6

Explanation:

Sentence 3 has a logical fallacy. Just because most people use fossil - fuels daily doesn't mean they will use them unnecessarily. It makes an over - generalization. Also, sentence 5 provides a very specific and somewhat out - of - place statistic without proper context in the overall argument flow. Removing or revising these can improve clarity.

Answer:

sentence 3, sentence 5