by dan Tue Oct 27, 2009 4:01 pm
We have this basic argument core:
road closed, preserve's population nearly doubled -----> thus, keep road closed, entire valley's population will increase
Notice that the supporting premise is in regard to the preserve's population, whereas the conclusion is in regard to the entire valley's population. This would be a flawed argument if we knew that the rest of the valley (the area outside the preserve) could experience a BIG drop in population in the years to come (to counteract the potentially big increase inside the preserve). Answer choice (E) indicates that this is a possibility, because this is what happened over the past eight years (if the total valley population stayed roughly constant, and the area inside the preserve experienced a near doubling of population, then the area outside the preserve must have experienced a significant drop in population).
Answer (D) is close (it weakens, but not as much as (E)). Any old "decrease" in population outside the preserve might not be enough to counter the big increase within the preserve.
Hope that helps!
dan