Contrary to Malthus' s arguments, human foodproducing capacity has increased more rapidly than human population. Yet, agricultural advances often compromise biological diversity. Ttherefore, Malthus' s prediction that insufficient food will doom humanity to war, pestilence, and famine will likely be proven correct in the future, because a lack of biodiversity will eventually erode our capacity to produce food. The statement that human food-producing capacity has increased more rapidly than human population plays which one of the following roles in the argument? ['It is a part of the evidence used in the argument to support the conclusion that a well-known view is misguided.', 'It is a general fact that the argument offers reason to believe will eventually change.', "It is an observation that the argument suggests actually supports Malthus's position.", 'It is a hypothesis the argument provides reasons for believing to be presently false.']