---

From the conditions, we have C; B..D; B…E; A-D The band must tour Boston before they tour Evanston. Thus, Evanston cannot be toured first.
The correct answer is (A).

---

Correct Answer: D
The State Representatives' argument for banning smoking is based upon scientific research and the presence of a correlation between second-hand smoke and life expectancy. However, it could be strengthened if data existed to show that other regions that enacted tough anti-smoking reform experienced longer life spans. In other words, although we know there is a relationship between second- hand smoke and life expectancy, we do not know that enacting tough anti-smoking reform will influence second-hand smoke levels and thereby influence life expectancy.
A. The legislators' argument is about protecting people from second-hand smoke, not about taking one action versus another (i.e., the legislators are not comparing sources of toxin, but rather attempting to prevent one source from entering the air).

B. The question at hand does not pertain to the percent of the population that smokes but the ability of the law to extend life expectancy. This answer fails to make a connection between the proposed law and extending life expectancy.

C. Although the percent of the state population that smokes will affect the extent of the impact made by the law, it does not support the merits of the law in and of itself. In other words, the argument is not based upon the number or percent of the population that smokes (and by corollary the number and percent of the population affected by second-hand smoke). Rather, the argument is based upon a connection between removing second-hand smoke inhalation via legislation and lengthening life span. This answer provides no direct evidence to strengthen the link between removing second-hand smoke via legislation and lengthening lifespan.

D. The evidence that passing a similar law reduced cancer rates supports the legislators' case that banning smoking in many places will promote "length of lifespan" (i.e., with people dying of cancer less, they live longer).

E. The number of smokers in a nearby state does not influence whether banning second-hand smoke in the state in question will affect life expectancy. The large number of smokers up-stream will hurt air quality and length of life downstream (weakling the legislators' argument if it effected it at all). Fundamentally, this answer is wrong because it fails to strengthen the connection between removing second-hand smoke via legislation and lengthening life-expectancy.

---

Correct Answer: D
The conclusion to the argument is that "Samuel is obviously a bad fisherman" while the premise is Samuel's poor fishing performance relative to the peers on his fishing boat this past season. The argument is flawed as the conclusion does not follow from the premise. The line of reasoning fails to take into consideration other possibilities for Samuel's performance this past season: perhaps Samuel fished with different bait. Similarly, just because Samuel caught fewer fish in one season than five other individuals does not mean that he is a bad fisherman. It simply means that he caught fewer fish than five individuals in one season. This season could have been an exception in Samuel's career or his teammates could be far above average. A. The same logical flaws are at play in this answer (except in reverse). Using one season and a comparison to the fishermen on one boat does not provide a wide enough basis to make a judgment about a fishermen's ability relative to all other fishermen. Comparing this past season with another season still does not help to explain Samuel's poor performance this season (whereas knowing that Samuel used experimental bait this season would provide a justification for why Samuel caught few fish yet was still not a terrible fisherman).
B. Samuel's performance as a pilot does not relate to his ability as a fisherman. This answer is off topic.
C. On first glance, this looks like a good answer. However, it does not consider whether Samuel's teammates were sick during the same period. Perhaps one of Samuel's teammates was sick for two weeks.
D. This answer highlights something that made Samuel's fishing performance uniquely different than his teammates. Moreover, Samuel did not make the choice to fish with alternative bait--his captain ordered him to do it. If Samuel made the choice to fish with alternative bait, it would be his poor fishing judgment that would be at fault. Similarly, the answer makes clear that no other fisherman on Samuel's boat faced the same predicament.
E. If anything, this answer strengthens the argument.

---

Correct Answer: E
Explanation:
The author’s contention (argument) is that the French are very fond of junk food because there are so many American restaurants in Paris. The best way to defeat this argument is to show, if possible, that the French do not eat in those American restaurants. The closest to that is answer E which suggests that the American tourists are the ones who eat at those restaurants.

---

Correct Answer: D
Explanation:
Since this is an ‘except’ question we must find four ways for Barbie to strengthen her position. The one answer that doesn’t strengthen her conclusion will be correct. Barbie wants to use an agent and choices C and E point out benefits of the agent, while choices A and B point to reasons why the internet is not necessarily better. A careful look at D suggests that the agent might not always get the seller the best price, and so that is the best answer.