Statement (A). "If the shadow casted is 532 long, and if the angle of elevation of the sun is 25.7°, 
then the height of the tree approximately equals to 378 ft."


    We are given tan(25.7°) = 0.4817.

    For the height of the three, we have the formula

        h = shadow*tan(25.7°) = 532*0.4817

    Value 0.4818 is close to 0.5 (slightly less), so the formula (1) should give  the value about half of 532, i.e. about 260;

    but the statement says it is about 378 ft, which is, OBVIOUSLY, far away from the expected value.


    So, the statement (A) is incorrect - - - we should decline it . . . 


Same or similar logic should work in other cases - - - TRY IT . . . 




For example, for statement (B), the angle 48.5° is close to 45°;  so, tan(48.5°) is close to 1;

the height of the tree 256 ft (given) should be close to the shadow length, but it is not the case.


So, statement (B) is FALSE, too.




In case (C), elevation angle of 36.8° is less than 45°, so we can expect that the shadow is longer than the height,

but given data contradicts it.  So, statement (C) is FALSE, too.



Thus the answer to the problem's question is (D), and I explained you WHY.