If it rains a lot in April, then in May lots of flowers will bloom. It doesn't rain a lot in April. Therefore, lots of flowers aren't blooming in May. Identify the common form of the argument or fallacy. Direct Argument Fallacy of the Converse Contrapositive Reasoning Fallacy of the Inverse Transitive Reasoning Misuse of Transitive Reasoning Disjunctive Reasoning Misuse of Disjunctive Reasoning Determine whether the argument is valid or invalid. Valid Invalid

The argument you've presented falls under the Contrapositive Reasoning Fallacy of the Inverse. This is because it attempts to infer the absence of the consequent (lots of flowers blooming) based on the absence of the antecedent (it raining a lot in April), which is a classic logical misstep. In this case, the argument is invalid. Just because it doesn't rain a lot in April doesn't automatically mean that flowers won't bloom in May. There could be other factors, like prior rainfall or the type of flowers, influencing their growth and blooming. So, keep an open mind; logic isn't always as straightforward as it seems!