medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Meteorologist: Several computer models predict a mild winter for the northern region. However, these models fail to account for the unusually low sea-surface temperatures in the Atlantic, which in the past have been a reliable predictor of severe winters. Thus, we should prepare for more snowfall than average this year.
The meteorologist responds to the computer models' predictions by
- Pointing to a variable the models leave out that, if considered, points toward the opposite forecast.
- Supplying concrete evidence that the models were deliberately tampered with so as to yield a preferred result.
- Showing that the several models actually contradict one another in the forecasts they ultimately produce.
- Maintaining that the models rest on observational data that has recently been shown to be inaccurate.
- Demonstrating that sea-surface temperatures have, in fact, never reliably predicted a given winter's severity.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ