Ok: I still don’t really understand this question. No one of these cards is able to validate this question, in my opinion. You could arrange them thus:
1. Nerd ::4. Poor communicator.
2. Jock ::3. Good communicator
However I would see this as invalid. On the other hand,
1. Nerd ::3. Good communicator
2. Jock ::4. Poor communicator.
does not validate the statement that you give.
Also, the statement says geek, the cards say nerd.. unless you assume the same definition, you really can’t use any of the cards here, because frankly, none of the cards have any direct relation to the statement. What’s more, if the cards were double sided with either 1::3 and 2::4 or 1::4 or 2::3, then it would be a similar problem to the first one… here, on the other hand, it’s different. Also… you say the answer is on the back: none of the statements on the cards will, by themselves, validate this statement… or for that matter, really, in conjunction with others as unless you give definitions, or decide on your terms, the cards have no real relation to the statement.