please help !!!!!!
Consider the following situation and explain what might be a problem with the credibility of the source or the thinking involved: Your friend has been crowned Homecoming Queen for this year and she has decided to write her research paper on the problems that "Queens" have with their courts. She is going to compare herself and her "court" with Queen Elizabeth I and her court. Pitfalls in credibility?
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga.
Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus.
Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
To get to the main logical problem, you have to go back to the definition of queen. How would using her own experience as Homecoming Queen help her understand the problems Queen Elizabeth had? Is she really establishing credibility with her experience as Homecoming Queen?