Consider the following three statements, namely S1, S2 and S3:
S1. Protecting the environment is an existential exigency for humans, given the impact of environmental degradation on climate change.
S2. Scientific consensus has not been achieved with regard to the extent of the contribution of human intervention to climate change.
S3. Environmental activism includes climate alarmism and other extremist points of view that often become the focus of climate change deniers.
Which of the following relationships based on the statements given above is/are correct?
- 1.S3 is a counterpoint to S1
- 2.S3 is unconnected to S1 and S2
- 3.S2 could be the reason for S3
Select the answer using the code given below.
Answer & explanation
Answer: (d) 3 only
All three statements belong to the same climate debate, so relationship 2 is false — and every option except (d) contains it. S3 does not argue against S1; it only notes that extreme voices within activism give deniers a target. The open question in S2 about how much humans contribute can explain why both alarmism and denial thrive.
- ✗ 1. S3 does not deny that protecting the environment is vital; it describes extreme views within activism that deniers seize on. That is a comment on the debate, not a counter-argument to S1.
- ✗ 2. S3 is about environmental activism and climate change deniers — the same subject as S1 and S2.
- ✓ 3. The lack of scientific consensus on the human contribution (S2) leaves room for alarmist and extremist positions and for deniers to target them (S3).
Remember · When one relationship is clearly false, strike every option containing it first; often a single option survives.
Question and answer: UPSC's provisional GS Paper II (2026, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). ·