LSAT 85 Section 2 Question 8 MC (I find the theory behind it unfair)

I say go go go

I see that the conclusion is based on a resolve the paradox.

But I find that unfair for a MC question because resolving something does not make it the conclusion of a paragraph.

Example:
If I make a paragraph on what really went down on Roswell, the point is asking all the crazy thing. The main summary would be “something weird happened that caused people to look into”.

If I give explanations (aliens, CIA, time travelers, big foot) that doesn’t justify it to say that’s the conclusion. I would say “ummm no, this just means reasons for what is it”. Reasons for what? The mystery (HENCE THE CONCLUSION)

Are resolving paradox's conclusions now for modern LSAT?