Answer E

@Julie, This is a weaken question, so we are looking for an answer choice that would most weaken the government's claim. The government claims that its increased efforts to halt the destruction of the tropical rain forest are proving effective given the satellite data. Let's look at the answer choices: (A) strengthens the government's argument. Its efforts must indeed be effective if deforestation rate has slowed down despite landowners' opposition.; (B) is the correct answer as it provides an alternative explanation for a lower than usual deforestation rate, i.e. heavy rain during the burning season rather than increased law-enforcement efforts; (C) strengthens/ or has no impact. It is a nice statistic, and it shows that the government is taking action but it is impossible to evaluate it in a vacuum without having data from prior years; (D) has no impact on the argument. The fact alone that we are unable to confirm the data does not mean that the satellite data is invalid; (E) has no impact on the argument. Even assuming this statement is true, it is still plausible the government spent millions of dollars on enforcement and even larger sum on research. Let me know if this is helpful.

Hi, I choose B as my answer choice. However, I tussled between B and D for a while. For answer choice D, why doesn't lack of confirmation equally invalidity?And will this concept by true in other weaken questions/lsat questions or particularly just this question?