Claim 1: Genetic engineering results in farms that

Question

are less environmentally friendly. A large number of
genetically modified crops are engineered to be
resistant to chemical herbicides. The idea is that
chemicals, most of which are highly dangerous, are
sprayed with abandon on fields but only kill weeds
and undesirable plants—not the GMO crops
themselves. It doesn’t take a lot of thought to
realize why this is a bad idea. If farmers don’t have
to worry about killing their crops, they aren’t going
to give a lot of thought to how many chemicals
they’re using.
Claim 2: Genetic engineering results in farms that
are more environmentally friendly. In 2019, about
80 percent of the corn grown in the United States
was Bt corn, a genetically modified variety. The
chief difference between Bt and standard corn is
that this modified crop produces Bacillus
thuringiensis, a bacterial insecticide that has
reduced the need for chemical pesticides. The use
of crops such as these have reduced the amount of
chemicals used in fields by over one-third, which in
turn boosts the health of soil, air, and local water
supplies.
A)
Use the passage to answer the question.
Compare the two claims above. How does the
first claim establish an informal style when
compared to the second claim?
(1 point)
by using a third-person perspective
by including anecdotal evidence
by avoiding complex syntax
by using conversational language

Answer 1

The first claim establishes an informal style when compared to the second claim by using conversational language. The phrasing "It doesn’t take a lot of thought to realize why this is a bad idea" reflects a more casual, informal tone as it speaks directly to the reader in a conversational manner. In contrast, the second claim employs a more formal and factual tone, focusing on statistics and research findings without such direct engagement with the reader.