Target2009 -
Not every argument has a conclusion and not every that seems controversial or opinionated is a conclusion.
A conclusion is at its essence a statement that is supported by other statements in the stimulus (the premises).
For example, take the argument "Fish is better than chicken because fish is higher in Omega 3 and the food that is higher in Omega 3 is better." The reason that the first portion is a conclusion is not because it is controversial to say "Fish is better than chicken" and not because it is opinion, but because that statement is supported by other statements in the stimulus. If you say "why is fish better?" The other statements provide an answer, "because fish has more Omega 3 and more Omega 3 means better."
In terms of this particular question, the second portion is not a conclusion because it is not supported in the stimulus. That last line is just an analogy. It is the author who made the analogy, but it is not a conclusion.
Does that help?
