medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
An environmental scientist argues that because the implementation of carbon taxes in several European nations was followed by a 10 percent reduction in industrial emissions, carbon taxes are the primary cause of emission reductions globally.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the scientist's argument?
- Throughout the very period in which the taxes took effect, those same nations were also pouring far greater sums into renewable-energy development.
- The overwhelming bulk of the world's total carbon output originates in countries that have so far flatly declined to adopt any carbon tax at all.
- A number of large industrial firms in the taxed nations complained loudly that the new levy had sharply raised the cost of running their daily operations.
- The 10 percent emissions decline fell somewhat short of the more ambitious figure environmental advocates had initially forecast and publicly promised.
- Carbon taxes have, without a single exception anywhere, completely eliminated all industrial emissions wherever they have ever been formally enacted.
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