CRITICAL REASONING QUESTION

kazemi

Columnist: Much of North America and western Europe is more heavily forested and has less acid rain and better air quality now than five years ago. Though this may be due largely to policies advocated by environmentalists, it nonetheless lends credibility to the claims of people who reject predictions of imminent ecological doom and argue that environmental policies that excessively restrict the use of natural resources may diminish the wealth necessary to adopt and sustain the policies that brought about these improvements.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the columnist's reasoning?
(A) Nations sustain their wealth largely through industrial use of the natural resources found within their boundaries.

(B) The more advanced the technology used in a nation's industries, the greater is that nation's ability to devote a portion of its resources to social programs.

(C) A majority of ecological disasters arise from causes that are beyond human control.

(D) If a compromise between the proponents of economic growth and the environmentalists had been enacted rather than the current policies, the environment would have seen significantly less improvement.

(E) The concern demonstrated by a nation for the health and integrity of it natural ecosystems leads to an increase in that nation's wealth.

sdcar2010

This is an old LSAT question.  The answer is A.

The conclusion of the arugment is that excessive restriction on using natural resources diminishes the wealth.  Choice A simply points out that a nation sustains its wealth by exploiting the natural resources.

kazemi

I heard the OA is E, that's why I'm seeking help here...

sdcar2010

E is a weakener.