Although there has been great scientific debate for decades : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 21 Jan 2017, 01:28

### 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

# Although there has been great scientific debate for decades

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 29
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2007, 13:01
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Although there has been great scientific debate for decades over global warming, most scientists now agree that human activity is causing the Earth’s temperature to rise. Though predictions vary, many global warming experts believe that average global temperatures will rise between three and eight degrees Fahrenheit during the next century. Such an increase would cause an alarming rise in sea levels, displacing millions of people by destroying major population centers along the world’s coastlines.

Which of the following is an assumption in support of the argument’s conclusion?

A. New technological developments in the next century will not divert rising seas from the world’s coastal cities.

B. Individuals will not become more aware of the steps they can take to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.

C. Rising sea levels similarly affect all coastal population centers.

D. Some global warming experts predict a greater than eight degree Fahrenheit increase in global temperatures during the next century.

E. Human activity is the sole cause of increasing global temperatures.
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 93
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2007, 13:14
Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 384
Followers: 3

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

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2007, 13:15
A is good
Intern
Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 29
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2007, 13:25
Why not C, I felt A was bit out of scope as there is not talk about next centuary "technological advances" at all.
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 288
Location: The 408
Followers: 3

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

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2007, 14:49
C

we're assuming all costal cities will be affected equally, and if so it supports the statement
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 288
Location: The 408
Followers: 3

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

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2007, 14:50
a3d wrote:
Why not C, I felt A was bit out of scope as there is not talk about next centuary "technological advances" at all.

Manager
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 93
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2007, 15:30
a3d wrote:
Why not C, I felt A was bit out of scope as there is not talk about next centuary "technological advances" at all.

if you look at 'technological advances' literally then yes it seems out of scope. but look at it this way. we are given that rising temp will cause rise in sea levels and that will destroy the major coastal population centers. now to find the assumption we need something that will fall apart above sequence if refuted.

now if we refute A, that means we will have some technological solution that will prevent the rising sea level from destroying the coastal population centers and the conclusion falls apart.

but C is not true, because the conclusion has nothing to do with how rising sea levels affect the coastal population center. it could have different levels of affect on different centers.
VP
Joined: 28 Mar 2006
Posts: 1381
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2007, 17:24
I would say E

Conclusion is : human activity is causing the Earth’s temperature to rise

We need a assumption which when negated makes the conclusoion fall apart

E should be it
Intern
Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 29
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2007, 18:07
OA is A
Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 931
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 175 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2007, 23:09
ankita wrote:
a3d wrote:
Why not C, I felt A was bit out of scope as there is not talk about next centuary "technological advances" at all.

if you look at 'technological advances' literally then yes it seems out of scope. but look at it this way. we are given that rising temp will cause rise in sea levels and that will destroy the major coastal population centers. now to find the assumption we need something that will fall apart above sequence if refuted.

now if we refute A, that means we will have some technological solution that will prevent the rising sea level from destroying the coastal population centers and the conclusion falls apart.

but C is not true, because the conclusion has nothing to do with how rising sea levels affect the coastal population center. it could have different levels of affect on different centers.

Thanks, excellent explanation!
25 Jul 2007, 23:09
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 CR Revision: Although there has been great scientific debate for 4 31 Jan 2016, 22:54
18 Assumption Revision: Although there has been great scientific 5 22 Feb 2015, 20:10
5 Although there has been great scientific debate for decades 11 02 Jun 2011, 11:15
6 Although there has been great scientific debate for decades 33 14 Apr 2010, 01:41
Although there has been great scientific debate for decades 12 13 Sep 2008, 01:59
Display posts from previous: Sort by