#15 - According to current geological theory

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Strengthen—CE. The correct answer choice is (D)

This Cause/Effect stimulus is much like many others on the LSAT; a causal relationship is presumed
to exist where only a correlation has been shown. The stimulus explains that at the end of the Ice Age,
the melting of ice depressurized the Earth’s crust, causing it to crack. The author then concludes that
the melting of ice likely helped to cause the earthquakes that took place in Sweden at the end of the Ice
Age. As we know, there are several ways to weaken a Cause/Effect argument. Since we are asked to
strengthen the argument, however, we should seek to better establish this causal connection.

Answer choice (A): Since this cracking would not necessarily cause any kind of large earthquakes, this
choice would not help explain the earthquakes discussed in the stimulus.

Answer choice (B): The cracks in Northern Europe do not help establish the connection between the
cracks and earthquakes, so this choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): Since we cannot assume that Northern Canada was significantly affected by melt-off
from the Ice Age, and cannot assume that the crust in Canada cracked, this choice does not help establish
a relationship between the cracks and earthquakes.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. If cracks generally cause severe earthquakes in the immediate area, it seems more likely that they had something to do with the earthquakes in Sweden.
Since this answer provides a causal connection between the cracks and the earthquakes, it is the correct
choice.

Answer choice (E): By offering an alternative cause of earthquakes, this answer choice actually weakens
the causal argument.

[emilysnoddon]

Hello,

For this question, I thought that we needed to establish that there were in fact cracks in the earth's crust near Sweden in order to show that the melting of ice contributed to these earthquakes. Therefore, I picked answer choice B. I had originally picked answer choice D because I saw that this connected earthquakes to the cracking of the earth's crust near the earthquake site but I was thrown off by the fact that nowhere in the stimulus does it say that there were cracks near Sweden. Please let me know how to better understand this question.

Thank you,

Emily

[BethRibet]

Hi Emily,

Thanks for the question.

While it's true that you could also strengthen this argument by establishing that there were cracks near or at the Swedish earthquake sites, there are generally multiple ways to potentially strengthen an argument. So though of course you can prephrase, it's never a good idea to assume that there is only one possible right answer, at least with a strengthen question. Answer choice B doesn't in fact establish that there were cracks at the earthquake site, since it's generally referencing "areas in Northern Europe", which might or might not include Sweden, and the specific earthquake sites.

But D as you noted, does strengthen this argument, as it makes the conclusion more likely.

Hope this helps!
Beth