[arroberts]

I don’t understand why D isn’t a possible answer.

I know that the argument is falsely equating a body of circumstantial evidence to a rope, and the flaw continues throughout the stimulus. Did I miss something?

[LSAT Dan]

I think the problem with (D) is that it’s not true that the argument fails to indicate that the things being compared share any similarities. The rope is being compared to the (entire) body of evidence, and a similarity is offered – the more “pieces” it has, the stronger it is.

[arroberts]

Thanks Dan! Makes sense now :-).

[LSAT Dan]

Glad you found it helpful!