Choose the logical conclusion:
"No drone without obstacle avoidance sensors is permitted to fly over commercial orchards. All registered survey drones have obstacle avoidance sensors. Drone Alpha is not permitted to fly over commercial orchards."
Can it be definitively concluded that Drone Alpha is not a registered survey drone?
Options:
(A) Yes, definitively
(B) No, because Drone Alpha might be a registered survey drone that was grounded for other regulatory reasons
(C) Yes, because all drones without obstacle avoidance are survey drones
(D) No, because obstacle avoidance sensors are unnecessary in orchards
Answer Key:
B
Step-by-Step Solution & Explanation
**Method 1: Fallacy of Denying the Consequent / Inverse Error**
The rule states: 'Without obstacle sensors $\implies$ Not permitted'.
This does NOT mean 'Not permitted $\implies$ Without obstacle sensors'. A drone might have obstacle sensors (and be registered) but be denied permission due to bad weather, airspace restrictions, pilot licensing, etc. Thus, it cannot be definitively concluded that Drone Alpha is not registered. Option **B** is correct.