Please explain

Conclusion: The ancient Egyptian pharaoh Akhenaten was well loved and highly respected by his subjects. Why? His palace guards showed him fierce loyalty--as documented in reports written during Akhenaten's reign. What's the issue here? We are making a conclusion about all of Akhenaten's subjects from evidence about a select portion of them: his palace guards. What is definitive about the palace guards? They are charged with the responsibility of guarding the pharaoh, and so they--specifically--must show the pharaoh fierce loyalty to adequately fulfill their duty to him as the palace guard. Thus, their fierce loyalty does not necessarily have to be indicative of the rest of the subjects' feeling for the pharaoh, rather a mere requirement of being the palace guard. Therefore, the sample used as evidence for the conclusion that all of the pharaoh's subjects love and respect him is most likely not representative of how the rest of his subjects feel and/or treat him. That is exactly what answer choice (C) states: "make a generalization based on a sample that is likely to be unrepresentative." Hope that clears things up! Please let us know if you have any other questions.

Awesome, thank you!