@PennJoon2025 I get this logic... but the program in the stimulus instructs parents on how to be a teacher for their child. If most of the parents in the study already know how to teach, then this argument is weaker. It's not invalid, since we don't know how large the sample size is. However, we can see how arguing for the efficacy of these programs is less reliable when most (more than 50%) of parents participating already know how to teach.

@RobertCarlson I did the same thing! My fatal error on this test is making assumptions about things that are not there. The stimulus said that it precludes recreation and would be a salvation to wildlife. The wording kind of confused me, but I believed it to be saying that there would be less recreation - which is correct. I made the erroneous assumption that an observatory would still bring recreation, which is not said in the stimulus. I got it right on my blind review when I realized that.

So far this is the only thing I'm good at. But I'll take it - the LSAT is a reading test in a logic costume.

@soleluna883 I was digging through the comments looking for something that makes it make logical sense to me. I still think D requires us to make just as many assumptions as A, but your explanation is the best to me. They would oppose tearing it down and replacing it because they already know that the government will build a new one nearby.

@azahthomas661 Yes! I was thinking of the word in terms of how we think about it in the LSAT, which the tutor above stated is not what it means in this case.