Not sure if this will help anyone else but it helped me.

B is wrong because even if the leopard magpie moth DOES have the speed or the agility to escape from potential predators, that means it has that ability with or without the natal grass.

That means that whatever population of leopard magpie moth exists currently, it exists with the two defenses of speed or the agility and highly unpalatable.

if you take away one of those defenses (the natal grass makes them highly unpalatable) then they could be in danger of extinction.

the argument still sucks, but our job with NA is not to improve the argument, its to get into the author's head. The author here is clearly assuming the natal grass is the crux of the leopard magpie moth not going extinct, so we have to roll with that.

i broke down the 2nd statement as if halogen AND from major manufacturer, most on display at Furniture Labyrinth.

This lead to me looking for a most relationship in the answer choices, because I thought that was part of the structure.

how can I avoid this in the future?

This question turns on understanding two main things:

1) The analogy being made is between the power plant emissions and the speed of the car (not the emissions of the car)

2) Realizing the question stem is asking about what is analogous to the time a vehicle spends at a stoplight, not traffic

Once you understand these things, you understand that car speed at stoplight= 0mph, so for Levin's analogy to hold we need that to to be analogous to a power plant emitting 0 pollutants.

I personally do 5-8 LR question drill and just let 7Sage pick the questions & difficulty. Helps get my brain into "LSAT mode"

@EmaKimoto I hope they do yours, I'm having the same result!

D feels like both a sufficient and necessary assumption, no?