LSAT CR from Aristotle Collection

[sherlock]

Older United States automobiles have been identified as contributing disproportionately to global air pollution. The requirement in many jurisdictions that automobiles pass emission-control inspections has had the effect of taking many such automobiles out of service in the United States as they fail inspection and their owners opt to buy newer automobiles. Thus the burden of pollution such older United States automobiles contribute to the global atmosphere will be gradually reduced over the next decade.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) It is impossible to separate the air of one country or jurisdiction from that of others.
(B) When automobiles that are now new become older, they will, because of a design change. Cause less air pollution than older automobiles do now.
(C) There is a thriving market for used older Untied States automobiles that are exported to regions that have no emission-control regulations.
(D) The number of jurisdictions in the United States requiring automobiles to pass emission-control inspections is no longer increasing.
(E) Even if all the older automobiles in the United States were retired from service. Air pollution from United States automobiles could still increase if the total number of automobiles in use should increase significantly.

OA C but wats wrong in E .. someone please explain the difference!!!

[GmatKiss]

I fell for E as well.

Remember one thing LSAT -not equal -GMAT

[killer1387]

Older United States automobiles have been identified as contributing disproportionately to global air pollution. The requirement in many jurisdictions that automobiles pass emission-control inspections has had the effect of taking many such automobiles out of service in the United States as they fail inspection and their owners opt to buy newer automobiles. Thus the burden of pollution such older United States automobiles contribute to the global atmosphere will be gradually reduced over the next decade.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) It is impossible to separate the air of one country or jurisdiction from that of others.
(B) When automobiles that are now new become older, they will, because of a design change. Cause less air pollution than older automobiles do now.
(C) There is a thriving market for used older Untied States automobiles that are exported to regions that have no emission-control regulations.
(D) The number of jurisdictions in the United States requiring automobiles to pass emission-control inspections is no longer increasing.
(E) Even if all the older automobiles in the United States were retired from service. Air pollution from United States automobiles could still increase if the total number of automobiles in use should increase significantly.

OA C but wats wrong in E .. someone please explain the difference!!!

C

Conclusion: the burden of pollution such older United States automobiles contribute to the global atmosphere will be gradually reduced over the next decade.

--> C is directly revealing that the older automobiles will still continue to pollute the global location as they are going to be used in other location. Hence it weakens.

E:-
As per argument "The requirement in many jurisdictions that automobiles pass emission-control inspections has had the effect of taking many such automobiles out of service in the United States "

i.e. automobile passing the inspection is ok and not problematic to global polltion.

now E says "Even if all the older automobiles in the United States were retired from service. Air pollution from United States automobiles could still increase if the total number of automobiles in use should increase significantly."

So even if use of automobiles, passed through inspection, are going to increase it is not in problematic zone as per argument, hence of no concern.