Sorry to hear this, man. The LSAC really are nothing but a bunch of racketeers and extortionists, no different than the Mafia. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the LSAC is one of the mob's rackets.

Looks like an accounting degree has its uses…

Not exactly; the stimulus speaks of income taxation, while answer choice A is about a particular tax on cars. It’s subtle, but they are very different. The trap that you speak of occurs in answer choice C.

I know this fella won’t see this, but I’m leaving it here for posterity. Maybe in 5 years someone else can reply to my comment. Rest assured, I’ll see it.

Yes, they tell us implicitly in the stimulus.The Exodus is stated to be a refractor, which is collimated at the factory and does not require collimation on the part of the consumer. Newtonians, on the other hand, are known to require collimation very often, without which image quality would be degraded. If it was found that the amateur astronomers’ Newtonian telescopes were un-collimated, it would appear to be a devastating blow to the argument. Though it is true that a refractor with high quality glass would provide a sharper view, and thus an 8-inch triplet apochromatic refractor would outperform an 8-inch Newtonian, we are told that the Newtonian in this case is double the aperture of the Exodus. Resolution is a function of aperture, so if the Newtonians are properly collimated it would provide reveal greater planetary detail and thus better planetary views than the Exodus, making it the superior choice for planetary observation. What's more, collimation does not require deftness. It's a simple process that can be learned within minutes.

Listen, I'm mostly ranting here. This question is a slam dunk, for reasons you stated, only if you don't know anything about amateur astronomy. But knowing even the smallest amount reveals several complications.

Worst question in LSAT history, IMO. Sorry fellas, but A is the true correct answer. Yes, we know if our telescopes in the stimulus require collimation. They explicitly tell us that the Exodus is a refractor and the other is a Newtonian reflector. Refractors are collimated at the factory and don’t require collimation on the part of the consumer. That is to say, they don’t require collimation. Newtonian reflectors regularly have to be collimated. No, this is not a process that requires deftness; it is a simple skill that can be learned within minutes. In fact, manufacturers have greatly streamlined the collimation process with simple to use collimation screws, adjustable without a tool, already built into the telescope. This is a ridiculous question. They should not touch topics like this and should stick to abstract concepts for questions if they aren’t going to craft a sensible question.

With concern to A, we do know. Newtonians require collimation and refractors don’t.

Probably because the LSAT writers know nothing about amateur astronomy and crafted a logically “wrong” answer that, in reality, is practically correct.

Haha nice one, Mr. Ping! That was a masterful ruse with C, you guileful knave!

This one was even cuter.

That was a cute one.

Not to mention that collimation of Newtonian reflectors does not require deftness. It's a fairly basic skill that anyone can learn within minutes.

I have to say, this one really tripped me up when I first did it. I’m an amateur astronomer myself, and was blinded to the correct answer choice by my knowledge. I see now why A is incorrect. Personally, as an amateur astronomer, I don’t think B is a great choice and I truly and earnestly believe A is the true, practical answer. But logically I can see why B is correct. This was my thought process when I first went through it:

If it was found that the amateur astronomers' Newtonian telescopes were un-collimated, it would appear to be a devastating blow to the argument. The Exodus is stated to be a refractor, which is collimated at the factory and does not require collimation on the part of the consumer. Newtonians, on the other hand, are known to require collimation very often, without which image quality would be degraded. Though it is true that a refractor with high quality glass would provide a sharper view, and thus an 8-inch triplet apochromatic refractor would outperform an 8-inch Newtonian, we are told that the Newtonian in this case is double the aperture of the Exodus. Resolution is a function of aperture, so if the Newtonians are properly collimated it would provide reveal greater planetary detail and thus better planetary views than the Exodus, making it the superior choice for planetary observation.

Again, after reviewing this explanation video I now see why A is logically incorrect. I guess I got a bit too excited seeing an amateur astronomy question!

The comment about Charles being a very special dumbass gave this meager Sicilian peasant a good laugh. Thanks, Mr. Ping!