Two statements, one in boldface.
Geologist: The earthquake early-warning system aims to provide alerts seconds before shaking starts. However, densely populated cities near the epicenter would receive little or no warning, because seismic waves travel almost as fast as the alert signals. Thus, installing the system statewide would disproportionately benefit outlying areas rather than urban centers.
In the geologist's reasoning, the boldface statements play which of the following roles?
- The first offers historical evidence; the second uses that evidence to refute an opposing prediction.
- The first states a practical limitation of a system; the second draws a consequence that follows from that limitation. (correct answer)
- The first summarizes a cost-benefit analysis; the second recommends an alternative investment.
- The first presents the geologist's main conclusion; the second proposes a method for testing that conclusion.
Explanation: Boldface questions test your ability to identify the logical role that specific statements play in an argument's structure. You need to analyze how each bolded statement functions within the overall reasoning chain. The geologist presents a clear logical progression: The first boldface statement identifies a specific problem with the earthquake warning system—cities near epicenters won't get meaningful warnings because seismic waves travel nearly as fast as the alert signals themselves. This establishes a practical constraint on how the system works. The second boldface statement then logically follows from this limitation, concluding that the system would therefore help rural areas more than dense urban centers. Answer choice B correctly captures this relationship: the first statement identifies a practical limitation (the speed constraint), and the second draws a logical consequence from that limitation (unequal distribution of benefits). Choice A is wrong because neither statement provides historical evidence, nor does the second refute a prediction—it draws a conclusion about future outcomes. Choice C mischaracterizes both statements; the first isn't a cost-benefit analysis but a technical constraint, and the second doesn't recommend an alternative investment. Choice D incorrectly identifies the first statement as the main conclusion when it's actually supporting evidence, and the second doesn't propose any testing method. For boldface questions, always map the logical flow first: identify whether each statement is a premise, conclusion, evidence, counterargument, or limitation. Then match that structural role to the answer choices, focusing on the precise relationship between the two statements.