LSAT 21, Reading Comprehension, Q17, LSATHacks

RC Question 17 Explanation, by LSATHacks

DISCUSSION: The author aims to show that abiogenic theory could be a correct explanation of the origins of oil, even if there is currently no proof for the theory.

However, the author does not go so far as to say that the abiogenic theory is definitely correct.

___________

1. Abiogenic theory does not come from conventional biogenic theory. The two theories are contradictory.
2. This may be true, according to the passage, but it’s hardly the main point.
3. The author never says which theory is better. This passage is just a neutral description of abiogenic theory.
4. CORRECT. Lines 34-37 show that the author thinks abiogenic theory could be correct, even though there’s been no experimental proof so far.

   The author spends so much time describing the theory because he wants to show that it is plausible.

5. This isn’t true. Lines 1-2 say that most petroleum geologists (scientists) favor the biogenic theory.

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.