A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 17 Jan 2017, 18:56

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 15 Jun 2007
Posts: 100
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 72 [0], given: 0

A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2007, 08:27
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

50% (02:38) correct 50% (02:03) wrong based on 802 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?

A. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old.
C. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea turtles survive in the ocean until adulthood and return to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach.
D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs.
E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 170
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2007, 12:02
A?

I can probably think of a case for each of the other answers where the sea turtle population would still decrease as a result of the spill, so I'd guess on A...
Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 384
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2007, 12:06
I feel D here. A seems totally unrelated to the argument
VP
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1459
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 255 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2007, 18:07
stevegt wrote:
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?

A. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old.
C. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea turtles survive in the ocean until adulthood and return to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach.
D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs.
E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.

This is B.
The assumption here is that last year's hatching affect the number of turtle this year.
If turtles only come back when they are 10 years old, then last year's hatching will not affect the number of turtle.
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 611 [4] , given: 10

A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jun 2008, 19:17
4
KUDOS
24
This post was
BOOKMARKED
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?

A. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old.
C. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea turtles survive in the ocean until adulthood and return to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach.
D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs.
E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.
CEO
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2989
Followers: 60

Kudos [?]: 579 [0], given: 210

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jun 2008, 19:26
B because it provides an alternative explanation to why there could be more sea turtles returning in 5 years.

goalsnr wrote:
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting
ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from
hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s
Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’
prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has
proven unfounded.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in
refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?
A. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither
Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs
when they are ten years old.
C. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea
Beach.
D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant
decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on
Merrick sea turtle eggs.
E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase
the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to
nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.
Intern
Joined: 14 May 2008
Posts: 38
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jun 2008, 19:29
goalsnr wrote:
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting
ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from
hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s
Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’
prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has
proven unfounded.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in
refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?
A. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither
Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs
when they are ten years old.
C. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea
Beach.
D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant
decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on
Merrick sea turtle eggs.
E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase
the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to
nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.

B for me.
Manager
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Posts: 244
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 0

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jun 2008, 20:03
goalsnr wrote:
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting
ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from
hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s
Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’
prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has
proven unfounded.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in
refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?
A. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither
Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs
when they are ten years old.
C. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea
Beach.
D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant
decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on
Merrick sea turtle eggs.
E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase
the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to
nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.

B for me as it creates an opportunity for the explanation of the increased number of turtles laying eggs and also does not kill the environmentalists prediction
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 611 [0], given: 10

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2008, 16:28
OA is B
Director
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 954
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Followers: 76

Kudos [?]: 1270 [0], given: 40

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2010, 04:15
I marked B by PoE but I was confused b/w B and C.

Any expert view on this question?
_________________

Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Posts: 92
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 7

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2010, 06:16
I find option B most suitable.
The impact of the spill on Merrick sea turtle population can not be judged in 5 years as the average age of nesting tutle is 10 years.
Intern
Affiliations: USMA
Joined: 09 Apr 2010
Posts: 21
Location: DC
Schools: Columbia, NYU, Dartmouth, Darden
WE 1: Army
WE 2: Consultant
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 12

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2010, 10:39
I thought the answer is B.

Because a chemical spill occurred five years ago and turtles are returning to lay eggs on the beach, we can conclude that turtle population is unaffected by the spill.

If it takes 10 years to get to maturity and return to the beach to lay eggs, then turtles unaffected by the spill would return. Therefore, the environmentalist's drawn conclusion could still be true.
Intern
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 14
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
GMAT 1: 660 Q46 V35
GPA: 3.6
WE: Business Development (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 36

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Oct 2013, 11:05
goalsnr wrote:
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting
ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from
hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s
Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’
prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has
proven unfounded.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in
refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?
A. Th

I'll go for B, since it provides a reason why the number of turtles has increase.
Manager
Joined: 12 May 2013
Posts: 84
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 12

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Aug 2014, 04:12
how B ?

thank you!
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 544
Concentration: Technology, Other
GMAT 1: 0 Q47 V29
Followers: 35

Kudos [?]: 390 [6] , given: 606

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Aug 2014, 23:17
6
KUDOS
Below is my reasoning for B. Initially I also got stumped by B .
Regards.
Conclusion:
environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.
Premise:
1. A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, "the world’s sole nesting ground for Merrick sea turtles", and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching.
2. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago.
Assumption:These turtles are from the same batch that survived 5 years ago on Baker's Beach.
Weakener: What if these are not from that batch.Then that way environmentalist argument wont be broken and hence author conclusion wold be weaken.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?
B does that.
If Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old , then they are not from the same batch. They must be from an earlier batch and hence they were not impacted from the accident on Baker's Beach 5 years ago.
_________________

--------------------------------------------------------
Regards

EMPOWERgmat Instructor
Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 14
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 15 [1] , given: 0

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Aug 2014, 21:00
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
how B ?

thank you!

Let me highlight some of the key facts from the prompt first:

A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting
ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from
hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s
Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’
prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has
proven unfounded.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in
refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?

Goal:
We need to weaken the argument attempting to disprove environmentalists' claim that the sea turtle population would decline (put that another way: we need to show that the sea turtle population could still be harmed by the spill).

B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs
when they are ten years old.

If the turtles return when they're 10, then we have a scenario that shows that what's happening right now in no way can be used as a measure of the health of the sea turtle population. With this answer the turtles from the year of the spill could have been decimated, but the number of turtles right now could be bigger than ever if what we're seeing right now are those returning after 10 years.

If you'd like some additional follow up let me know. I'd be happy to help.
_________________

Allen T.
http://www.empowergmat.com

EMPOWERgmat GMAT Club Page, Study Plans, & Discounts

Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Nov 2013
Posts: 357
GMAT 1: 690 Q45 V39
WE: General Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 165 [0], given: 403

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Mar 2015, 03:35
goalsnr wrote:
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting
ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from
hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s
Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’
prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has
proven unfounded.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in
refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?
A. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither
Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs
when they are ten years old.
C. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea
Beach.
D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant
decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on
Merrick sea turtle eggs.
E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase
the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to
nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.

A- Contradicts the information in the passage.
B- We need to weaken the refutation. This option is plausible since it gives a reason to believe that indeed the eggs did not hatch and the returning females were actually born almost 5 years before the spill and thus remained unaffected.These females do not represent any successful hatching of eggs after the spill .
C-Irrelevant. Does not refute the prediction in any way. Instead it slightly strengthens the refutation.
D-Irrelevant. Does not refute the prediction in any way. Instead strengthens the refutation.
C-Irrelevant. Does not refute the prediction in any way. Instead it slightly strengthens the refutation.
_________________

Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.

I hated every minute of training, but I said, 'Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion.-Mohammad Ali

Intern
Joined: 18 May 2014
Posts: 36
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V35
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 32 [4] , given: 179

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2015, 09:03
4
KUDOS
B!

To prove : the population HAS INDEED come down (and will go down in future)

B proves that females take 10 years to return thus proving that the number of females who returned now would be born 10 years before thus we
cannot make judgement based on the number returned this year.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10529
Followers: 918

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Mar 2016, 13:24
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Manager
Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Posts: 81
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 41

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 May 2016, 19:11
What is wrong with D? Doesn't it provide an alternate explanatiion?
Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s   [#permalink] 28 May 2016, 19:11

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 23 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
5 RATT RACE: Five years ago 7 20 Apr 2016, 07:14
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were 3 27 Aug 2011, 23:46
25 Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were 28 06 Apr 2008, 04:44
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s 0 21 Jun 2010, 10:39
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were 13 28 Feb 2007, 23:57
Display posts from previous: Sort by