Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 17 Sep 2014, 10:19

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

1> In the years since the city of London imposed strict

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Mar 2008
Posts: 341
Location: Washington DC
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 27 [1] , given: 4

GMAT Tests User
1> In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink] New post 17 Apr 2008, 20:44
1
This post received
KUDOS
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 100% (01:35) wrong based on 1 sessions
1> In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.

Please provide reasons as well while answering question.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2995
Followers: 55

Kudos [?]: 435 [0], given: 210

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 17 Apr 2008, 20:57
B

Assumption questions - that means the answer will be the one option that will not break the conclusion : Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.

marshpa wrote:
1> In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.

Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry. This is a valid assumption since it attacks the reasoning.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air. I'd say this assumption has nothing to do with the actual argument which focuses on bird species rather than the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London. Another valid assumption since it talks about other major cities
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable. Fair assumption otherwise no point of imposing these rules.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area. Yup this supports assumption in option D

Please provide reasons as well while answering question.
1 KUDOS received
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 1560
Location: Ann Arbor
Schools: Ross '10
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 162 [1] , given: 1

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 18 Apr 2008, 00:11
1
This post received
KUDOS
Nice one! A surprisingly large number of folks fall for the EXCEPT question.

bsd, the question asks for a choice that is not a needed assumption for the conclusion to hold true.

(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.

Not a neccessary assumption. If the statement above is false, then the conclusion should fall apart. So what if the problem is not almost entirely cause by the local industry. The regulations if they still apply only to local industry will certainly bring down pollution by atleast some degree and therefore can be adopted elsewhere.

IMHO, A is the correct answer.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2995
Followers: 55

Kudos [?]: 435 [0], given: 210

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 18 Apr 2008, 00:27
Yeah upon second read I see what you are saying nc - +1.

However, it is still a rather contentious that the whole argument doesn't talk about air quality at all - I thought that might be too far fetched an assumption. But I guess E is pretty far fetched too.
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1550
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 205 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 18 Apr 2008, 01:25
I really think it's E. The are my reasoning for each of the answer choices:

a) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry
This is assumed. Why? because whenever an author mentions the cause for an effect in an argument, the assumption is that the author must have considered all the other possible causes and believes that those other causes are not possible, otherwise, the author would have included those other causes in the argument.

b) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air
This is assumed. Otherwise, the bird species would be dying rather than increase in number.

c) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London
This is assumed. Otherwise, the author when never recommend implementing this same strategy in other major cities to expect a similar result.

d) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable
This is assumed, otherwise why would the author use the number of bird species as an indication that the air-pollution problem is getting better? also, the author is encouraging other major cities to do the same thing. so he would like to see the same result happening in other major cities.

e) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area
NOT ASSUMED. The the argument merely says "the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically." Perhaps most of the birds are hiding in trees, but now most of the birds are flying around and people have started to see the birds more often.

My answer is E
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 295
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 3

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 18 Apr 2008, 02:45
YEah..
I think E is the Rite answer.

THe point that the sight of the birds relates with the actual increase in birds of the local area is not an necessary assumption.

whats the OA ?

regards,
Neo
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Mar 2008
Posts: 341
Location: Washington DC
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 4

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 18 Apr 2008, 07:56
OA is A. Good one Niceprasad.
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1550
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 205 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 18 Apr 2008, 10:30
would you be so kind to post the OE? Cause I don't understand how option A is the answer.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 19 Aug 2007
Posts: 206
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 20 Apr 2008, 16:44
marshpa wrote:
1> In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.

Please provide reasons as well while answering question.


I dont understand how A is the OA either.

The conclusion of imposing similar regulations in other major cities has no substantial backing if the air pollution problem is NOT caused entirely by local industry. if the local industry contributes only a small fraction to the the total air pollution problem, it would make more sense to focus on the industry/factors that have a greater impact on the total air pollution problem, i.e. people must ride their bikes to work from now on.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 451
Location: Earth
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 20 Apr 2008, 22:31
Wow. I was so sure it would be E.

I thought A is in fact an assumption.

Can you please elaborate ncprasad?
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 16 Aug 2004
Posts: 328
Location: India
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 21 Apr 2008, 04:24
Good one. Missed "almost entirely..." Went for B
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 01 May 2007
Posts: 795
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 21 Apr 2008, 04:52
I kind of agree it was E as well. It only says "seen". It never says it seeing them makes the assumption all species increases.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 41
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 21 Apr 2008, 06:20
I go for E as well. We are to select the answer that is not an assumption in making the argument. Only E is irrelevant. Whether the sighting of increase of birds reflects actual increase or not is not the base to proposal of impost of regulations.
2 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 451
Location: Earth
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 38 [2] , given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 21 Apr 2008, 07:33
2
This post received
KUDOS
http://gmatclub.com/forum/11-t45627

Looks like "almost entirely" in option A is the clue. Makes sense now. I am sure this 900 level CR.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 18 Feb 2008
Posts: 798
Followers: 20

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 25

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 21 Apr 2008, 09:58
kyatin wrote:
http://gmatclub.com/forum/11-t45627

Looks like "almost entirely" in option A is the clue. Makes sense now. I am sure this 900 level CR.


Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!

I think that explains to me why A is the right answer. I was choosing between B and E, didn't read A carefully enough to notice the "almost entirely" part. :oops:
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Mar 2008
Posts: 341
Location: Washington DC
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 4

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 21 Apr 2008, 10:20
Almost entirely part is really killing..Until now I was also not sure why A was correct.
Thanks Kyatin.
1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 451
Location: Earth
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 38 [1] , given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 21 Apr 2008, 10:59
1
This post received
KUDOS
Friends,

Over last few days ( after observing close call mistakes) , I am noticing frequently...that in CR and RC as well....the trick they play on us is give one answer that is close candidate for selection (or too obvious for rejection -as in this one), and then they introduce some kind of extremity with such words as never,almost,most,least etc... I went back on some missed RCs/CRs and saw this was quite a pattern.

I am sure we can watch out for such exaggerations to effectively eliminate these tempting but wrong answers when its tough to call.

Just thought I will share this.

Happy prepping 8-)
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Mar 2008
Posts: 341
Location: Washington DC
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 4

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR-London City. [#permalink] New post 22 Apr 2008, 12:45
Kyatin,
Really a nice catch. +1 to you..
We should come up with these patterns so in the exams when answers are little haszy we can crack.
Re: CR-London City.   [#permalink] 22 Apr 2008, 12:45
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
In the years since the city of London imposed strict mailtheguru 11 08 Jun 2006, 06:40
In the years since the city of London imposed strict joemama142000 1 31 Oct 2005, 19:18
In the years since the city of London imposed strict nakib77 5 21 Sep 2005, 09:37
In the years since the city of London imposed strict ywilfred 12 02 Sep 2005, 07:09
In the years since the city of London imposed strict cybera 4 14 Jul 2005, 09:36
Display posts from previous: Sort by

1> In the years since the city of London imposed strict

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.