PrepTest 158, Section 4, Question 8
Climatologist: The waters off the Pacific coast of(57 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(11 more words not shown)
- ASome scientists have(21 more words not shown)
- BThe warming of(24 more words not shown)
- CThe conclusion that(30 more words not shown)
- DThe warming of(21 more words not shown)
- EIf the warming(37 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The water got warmer. The dispute is over what that tells us.
Some scientists read the fifteen-year temperature rise as a symptom of global warming caused by human-generated pollution. The climatologist pushes back: ocean temperatures also undergo natural cycles lasting sixty years or more. Perhaps a fifteen-year rise is part of one of those cycles.
That alternative gives us a reason to question the scientists' interpretation. It doesn't establish that human-caused warming is impossible, or even that a natural cycle explains this particular rise. We need to keep the climatologist's stated claim modest: the proposed conclusion is far from justified.
What we’re looking for
For the main-conclusion question, unpack “this conclusion.” It refers to the scientists' claim that the Pacific warming is a symptom of more general, human-caused warming. The climatologist's point is that this interpretation hasn't been adequately supported. The fact about natural cycles supplies the reason for that objection.
Working the answers
- A
The temperature rise is the observation both interpretations are trying to address. The climatologist doesn't mainly argue that it occurred; the passage starts by accepting it. The conclusion concerns what we are justified in inferring from it.
- B
This goes too far. Saying an interpretation hasn't been justified isn't the same as saying it is false. The climatologist questions the evidence for linking this local rise to human-caused global warming; B declares that the link doesn't exist.
- CCorrect
This restates the exact strength and subject of the conclusion. The claim that these warming waters are a symptom of more general warming caused by human pollution is far from justified. C preserves the challenge to the inference without turning it into a denial of the phenomenon.
- D
This captures the alternative explanation suggested by the natural cycles. But why does the climatologist bring up that possibility? To challenge the scientists' interpretation. D gives a supporting idea and leaves out the conclusion that the interpretation is unjustified.
- E
The climatologist doesn't establish this either-or rule. A natural cycle contributing to the local warming wouldn't, by itself, rule out a contribution from broader human-caused warming as well. The stated conclusion questions the evidence; it doesn't claim that the two explanations are mutually exclusive.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.