QUESTION TEXT: Researcher: Dinosaurs lack turbinates—nasal…
QUESTION TYPE: Role in Argument
CONCLUSION: The paleobiologists are wrong to think that all dinosaurs were cold-blooded.
REASONING: Paleobiologists noted that dinosaurs lacked turbinates, which are typical of warm blooded species. While this is true, some dinosaurs lived in Australia and Alaska, with temperatures below freezing. Only warm blooded creatures can survive below freezing.
ANALYSIS: The question is asking about the reason for mentioning that only warm blooded animals can survive below freezing. This fact combines with another fact (dinosaurs lived in areas with cold temperatures) to prove that some dinosaurs must have been warm blooded.
- Nonsense. The conclusion is that some dinosaurs were warm blooded. A counter-example to that would be a cold blooded dinosaur.
- CORRECT. This best describes the statement in question. It’s just a premise. It combines with another premise to support the conclusion.
- The author didn’t challenge the claim that dinosaurs lack turbinates.
- The conclusion is that the paleobiologists must be mistaken. The word “however” and “must” are both conclusion indicators.
- Nonsense. The claim “only warm blooded animals can survive below freezing” is presented without support. The fact that dinosaurs lived in Alaska doesn’t strengthen or weaken that claim.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly