medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
The recent decline in the population of bees in the region is a direct consequence of the widespread use of Neonicotinoid pesticides. Since farmers began using these pesticides five years ago, the bee population has dropped by 40%.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
- Bees are the chief pollinators of the very crops the farmers are treating with the pesticides.
- The same pesticides are used in neighboring regions where bee populations have held steady.
- A parasitic mite known to wipe out bee colonies was introduced to the region five years ago.
- The 40% decline figure comes from estimates produced by a local university research project.
- Neonicotinoid pesticides have been shown in laboratory studies to impair bees' navigation.
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