Flaws in SHL Test

As someone who has scored 97th to 99th percentile on exams such as the SAT, the LSAT and the GMAT, I found the Verbal Reasoning Exam prepared by SHL incredibly frustrating.  The exam is used by many hiring companies to screen candidates.  However, the exam is not only illogical at times; more dangerously, it sees the world as binary and does not account for non-binary events.  

Today's politically divided world is a result of people thinking through binary lens - should they vote for Trump or for Clinton?  Should the Britain remain in the EU or exit immediately?  Options like voting for third parties or written-in candidates, abstaining from voting due to choices one sees as unethical, running for office yourself and finding non-political solutions to economic problems do not enter the minds of people who think only through binary lens.  And such candidates may continue to think through binary lens after selection into the organization - for example, they may push for go or no-go on deals instead of trying to improve deal terms, influence their clients or change the nature of their own organizations.

Some examples of flaws with SHL Test are below.

• If the evidence states that a majority of shareholders voted for a proposal, the exam assumes that at least some shareholders voted against the proposal.  In fact, the remainder of shareholders could have abstained from voting.
• If the evidence states that a majority of scientific studies concluded X, the exam assumes that the remainder minority of scientific studies concluded NOT X.  In fact, the remainder minority may have been inconclusive studies, which is quite common in science.
• Even the example question below for SHL Verbal Reasoning Exam has, in my belief, the incorrect answer.  No where in the Description does it state that miners ever used the Hastings Line (only that they used the line for "freight traffic", which are goods).  As such, the answer should be "Cannot Say", not "False".  An even bigger issue with the answer's explanation is that it sees time as binary; so, if something is true in the present, it could not have also been true in the past.

It's no doubt all standardized tests (the SAT, LSAT, GMAT, etc.) all have similar flaws but SHL is more illogical than the rest.  In any case, we should as a society try to move away from standardized testing intended for drones to tests that truly reward creative problem-solvers.