PT 24 Section 2. Q 19

User avatar
mac35352
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 12:17 pm

PT 24 Section 2. Q 19

Postby mac35352 » Tue Mar 29, 2011 8:47 pm

This is a weaken except. How does D weaken the argument?
I see why E is correct but I don't understand why D is incorrect.
Help! Thanks

Kurst
Posts: 448
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:33 pm

Re: PT 24 Section 2. Q 19

Postby Kurst » Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:48 pm

Five years ago, in the event of a horrific traffic accident, the people involved had half as many emergency facilities at which they could be treated and possibly saved. Now, people who otherwise would have died in a traffic accident (possibly because there was no emergency facility nearby) could potentially be saved. The number of traffic fatalities may have declined because more people involved in traffic accidents are being saved at emergency facilities.

User avatar
mac35352
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 12:17 pm

Re: PT 24 Section 2. Q 19

Postby mac35352 » Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:20 pm

Kurst wrote:Five years ago, in the event of a horrific traffic accident, the people involved had half as many emergency facilities at which they could be treated and possibly saved. Now, people who otherwise would have died in a traffic accident (possibly because there was no emergency facility nearby) could potentially be saved. The number of traffic fatalities may have declined because more people involved in traffic accidents are being saved at emergency facilities.

Thank you. I got it :D




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests