Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT103 S3 Q12 Explanation

The Levant—the area that borders

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsMust be False

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

The Levant—the area that borders the eastern Mediterranean-was heavily populated in prehistoric times. The southern Levant was abandoned about 6,000 years ago, although the northern Levant, which shared the same climate, remained heavily populated. Recently archaeologists have hypothesized that the due to an economic collapse resulting from deforestation.

What this question is testing

Must be False

Premises

Two regions side by side, same climate. Around 6,000 years ago, the southern half empties out while the northern half keeps going strong. The archaeologists' best guess: the south chopped down its forests, the economy collapsed, and people had to leave.

Evaluate

The question asks what cannot be true if the facts and the hypothesis are both right. So we're looking for an answer that just doesn't fit with the deforestation story.

The key thing the deforestation hypothesis quietly requires: there had to be forests to begin with. You can't deplete trees that were never there. So any answer that says would directly contradict the hypothesis.

Goal

The right answer should say something logically incompatible with the deforestation explanation — most likely that the forests never existed.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
12.

If the statements above are true and the archaeologists’ hypothesis is correct, which one of the following

Answer choices

  1. Could Be True2% picked this

    The sheep and goats herded by the peoples of the southern Levant until 6,000 years ago grazed extensively on the seedlings and

    Sheep and goats grazing on tree seedlings and saplings is actually consistent with — even supports — the deforestation hypothesis. Grazing that kills off young trees is a classic mechanism by which forests fail to regenerate, contributing to deforestation. This can be true alongside the stated facts.

  2. Could Be True1% picked this

    Trees were used in the production of lime plaster, a building material used extensively throughout the southern Levant

    Heavy use of trees to make lime plaster is exactly the kind of demand that could drive deforestation. This answer supports the hypothesis — it gives a reason the forests were being used up. Perfectly consistent.

  3. Could Be True12% picked this

    Organic remains from the northern Levant reliably indicate that tree species flourished there without interruption during the period when the

    Trees flourishing in the northern Levant during the period actually fits well with the setup: the two regions shared the same climate, so the southern depopulation can't be blamed on temperature or rainfall. If the north kept its forests and the south did not, deforestation looks like a region-specific human-driven phenomenon — exactly what the hypothesis suggests.

  4. Correct83% picked this

    Carbon dating of organic remains from the southern Levant reliably demonstrates that there were no forests present in that area

    Why this is right

    This is the answer that cannot be true. The deforestation hypothesis requires that there were forests in the southern Levant before 6,000 years ago — they had to exist in order to be deforested. (D) says the opposite: carbon dating reliably shows no forests existed there prior to 6,000 years ago. If that were true, there was nothing to deforest, and the hypothesis is impossible. The two cannot both hold.

    Skill tested: Must be False · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Could Be True2% picked this

    Since there are few traces of either quarried stone or of mud brick in buildings excavated in the southern Levant, it is likely that

    Buildings made almost entirely of timber would mean massive demand for wood, which is consistent with — and indeed supports — the deforestation hypothesis. Heavy wood use as a building material gives the depletion mechanism teeth.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free