yazlal25
According to me the conclusion here was that they designed a new currency such that no one could counterfeit it and hence imo, answer should be B. I dont get why it isnt the answer? Is there an assumption that for every new design a counterfeit can be produced ? In that case I can understand that answer would be C. But if its designed in such a way that it cannot be counterfeited then there is no question of adopting new techniques of counterfeiting.
Somebody please explain.
The passage doesn't say that they designed a new currency that is
impossible to counterfeit. The passage simply tells us that the new currency "cannot be convincingly duplicated by the means used to successfully counterfeit the old bills."
In other words, the method(s) of duplicating the old bills won't work with the new bills.
Well, what if counterfeiters come up with NEW methods to duplicate the NEW currency? In that case, counterfeit bills will continue to be created, even with the new design. And if high-quality counterfeit bills are being produced, then they would be harder to detect (unlike the crude counterfeits).
We're told that it has been several months since any counterfeit currency has been found. That means one of two things:
1. Counterfeiters have adopted new counterfeiting techniques and are thus able to produce high quality duplicates that are harder to find.
Or,
2. Counterfeiters have largely abandoned their attempt to reproduce the new currency.
In order to conclude that #2 is the case, we have to assume that #1 has not happened, and that's exactly what (C) does.
(B) is out because we don't care about OTHER currencies outside of Lackland. Maybe the old methods CAN still be used to duplicate currencies in OTHER places. That doesn't affect this argument at all, so (B) is irrelevant.
I hope that helps!