Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Flaw Questions, Dec 00 and Oct 01 LSAT  (Read 841 times)

cafe au lait

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Flaw Questions, Dec 00 and Oct 01 LSAT
« on: October 20, 2010, 04:00:46 PM »
Hi All--can some one help me with these 2 problems?

Dec 00 LSAT Section 2 #15

#15 The ozone/ pollution problem where scientists want to reverse the effects by sending a space craft to observe and environmentalists contest to this because of the pollution the craft will emit.

I was down between A and C. But why is C incorrect?


Oct 01 LSAT, Section 2, #24

I was down to B and D. Why isnt D correct?

Thank you!

EarlCat

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2533
  • i'm in ur LSAT blowin' ur curve
    • AOL Instant Messenger - EarlCat78
    • View Profile
    • EarlDoesLSAT.com
Re: Flaw Questions, Dec 00 and Oct 01 LSAT
« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2010, 06:50:45 PM »
Hi All--can some one help me with these 2 problems?

Dec 00 LSAT Section 3 #15

#15 The ozone/ pollution problem where scientists want to reverse the effects by sending a space craft to observe and environmentalists contest to this because of the pollution the craft will emit.

I was down between A and C. But why is C incorrect?

Are the environmentalists really confused about the difference between preventing and reducing?

Quote
Oct 01 LSAT, Section 4, #24

I was down to B and D. Why isnt D correct?

Why "should" the conclusion focus on the relation between pravastatin and cholesterol levels?

cafe au lait

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Flaw Questions, Dec 00 and Oct 01 LSAT
« Reply #2 on: October 28, 2010, 06:56:09 PM »
Thank you for your response...actually for the first problem (scientists vs environmentalists) I was attracted to C because I thought the environmentalists flaw was that they failed to see the purpose of why they wanted to launch a space craft, that it was launched in order to gain the info to reverse the damage.

C says - fails to distinguish the goal of reversing harmful effects from the goal of preventing harmful effects...so I translated this as the env's not being able to see the difference between the scientists goals and their goal of not wanting excess pollution to begin with.