Is colin's evidence relevant to his claim?

read colin's argument.

nowadays, one often hears complaints that drones can

invade people's privacy. but this is not true. fying drones is

actually a sport. it requires coordination and technical skills

like other sports. in fact, there should be professional drone

tlying leagues. if people recognized this sport, they would no

longer complain about where and when drone owners flew

their drones

yes, because he gives evidence that flying drones is a

sport.

yes, because it is on the subject of people owning and

flying drones

no, because he only gives his own opinion rather than

providing evidence,

no, because it is about flying drones being a sport, not

about privacy issues.

save and exit

Colin's evidence is not relevant to his claim because it is about flying drones being a sport, not  about privacy issues.

Explanation: Colin's evidence is not related to his main claim, that is to say the assertion that drones do not invade people's privacy. Instead of focusing on providing evidence that supports the idea that drones do not affect people's privacy negatively, Colin offers evidence related to the thought that flying drones is a sport by stating that coordination and technical skills are necessary to fly drones. Therefore, it can be said that his argument lacks strength because it has not been properly supported.

D. No, because it is about flying drones being a sport, not

about privacy issues.

Explanation:

i did the test

which lines ? : )

explanation:

d

explanation: