How could anyone continue eating meat after learning about how the animals are treated? What makes this a weak claim for an argumentative research paper

It has no arguments supporting it.

Explanation:

Eventhoug it is a claim and has a statement about how people can continue eating meat after knowing how animals are treated, the important thing is to support the claim with facts and create arguments, this could be better expressed with: "Why does people are indifferent to animal suffering on meat farms?" so you can present the attrocities that animals live and how people are indifferent towards their suffering.

It's a weak claim because it's not even a claim. It's a question. Not only that it isn't claiming anything. A claim for this would be "Humans treat animals badly." That would be an example of a claim. I hope this works.