LSAT 23 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q22

LR Question 22 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Shortly after the Persian Gulf War, investigators…

QUESTION TYPE: Paradox

PARADOX: There wasn’t much oil pollution following the Persian Gulf war, despite oil spills and fires.

Specifically, there was less pollution than before the war, and there was less pollution than in the Baltic.

ANALYSIS: The stimulus didn’t say how much pollution was caused by wartime oil spills and fires. And we don’t know how much pollution occurs in peacetime.

Maybe regular oil production causes even more pollution.

___________

1. The stimulus didn’t say anything about the environmental effects of pollution. It only mentioned how many contaminants there were.
2. This makes the situation even more confusing. If pollution is slower to disappear in a desert, then why did the pollution disappear in the desert?
3. This helps explain why the Gulf was less polluted than the Baltic. But why was the Gulf itself less polluted after the war than before the war?
4. CORRECT. This does it. Sure, oil spills and fires cause pollution. But peacetime oil production caused even more pollution.
5. So? The oil spills and fires might still have caused a lot of damage, even if we expected more.

Recap: The question begins with “Shortly after the Persian Gulf War, investigators”. It is a Paradox question. Learn more about LSAT Paradox questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.