Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Easy

PT146 S4 P4 Q24 Explanation

Chlorofluorocarbons and the Ozone

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsStrengthenScience

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

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.

Passage

By 1970 it was well established that ultraviolet light from the sun contributes to skin cancer. Fortunately, much of the sun’s most damaging ultraviolet radiation is screened out by a thin, diffuse layer of ozone—a toxic to 25 miles above the earth’s surface.

During the 1970s, however, public policy makers worldwide were alerted to the fragility of the ozone layer through the pioneering research and advocacy of two Nobel Prize-winning scientists, Mario Molina and F. Sherwood Rowland. In the absence of pollutants, stratospheric ozone concentrations should remain stable over time, with natural production and destruction chemical reaction, each chlorine atom could destroy as many as 100,000 ozone molecules before becoming inactive.

In 1974 the two scientists estimated that the atmosphere contained the accumulation of five years of global CFC production. This meant that, given the rate of diffusion and breakdown of CFCs in the atmosphere, the depletion of the ozone layer would continue for years, if not decades, even if the production and Congress and was later appointed to the U.S. National Science Foundation Committee on Fluorocarbon Technology Assessment.

Predictably, the work of Molina and Rowland and their advocacy of dramatic policy changes were subjected to attacks by critics, especially scientists with ties to the CFC industry. However, over time their views were corroborated, especially by the discovery of a hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica, and this led to in packaging for consumer spray products and the development of more environmentally friendly refrigerant chemicals.

What this question is testing

Strengthen

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion more likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that are consistent with the argument but add no real support, or that strengthen a claim the argument doesn't make.

Winning move

Locate the gap between evidence and conclusion, then pick the choice that closes it.

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

The question
24.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusions of Molina and Rowland concerning the long-term effects of

Answer choices

  1. Correct80% picked this

    The hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica continued to grow for years after CFC

    Why this is right

    Answer A is correct.

    Skill tested: Strengthen · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  2. Trap3% picked this

    Other manufactured chemicals have been found to diffuse upward into the stratosphere when released

  3. Trap11% picked this

    Ozone has been shown to react more violently with chlorine than with

  4. Trap5% picked this

    Many scientists who in the 1970s were highly critical of the research methods of Molina and Rowland have come to accept

  5. Trap1% picked this

    Current CFC levels in the troposphere suggest that not all nations currently abide by

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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