Question

1. which line refutes the claim that dst is good for the environment? (to refute is to say or prove that something is wrong.)a \sunshine provides vitamin d, which brightens your mood and supports bone health.\ (p. 27)b \the government thought it would conserve energy for the war effort.\ (p. 27)c \so to enjoy that extra hour of sunlight, we often get in a car and drive somewhere, using gas we wouldnt otherwise use.\ (p. 27)d \that means from march to november, you get an extra hour of sunlight in the evenings.\ (p. 26)4. which statement below is not an argument that carro presents for keeping dst?a longer daylight hours promote safety.b spending time outdoors can positively affect your mental health.c sunshine is good for your body.d an extra hour of sunlight can be good for the economy.

Explanation:

For question 3: To refute that DST is good for the environment, we need a statement showing DST harms the environment. Option C states DST leads to more driving and extra gas use, which increases environmental harm. The other options either talk about health benefits, historical intent, or just a fact of DST, not environmental harm.
For question 4: We need to find the statement that is not an argument Carro makes for keeping DST. Options A, B, and C relate to safety, mental health, and physical health benefits of DST. Option D (economic benefit) is not listed as a pro-DST argument among the given choices.

Answer:

1. C. "So to enjoy that extra hour of sunlight, we often get in a car and drive somewhere, using gas we wouldn't otherwise use." (p. 27)
2. D. An extra hour of sunlight can be good for the economy.