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

 It is currently 11 Mar 2014, 15:47

### 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

# Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold

Author Message
TAGS:
Intern
Joined: 17 Apr 2011
Posts: 17
Followers: 0

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

Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold [#permalink]  26 Apr 2011, 21:53
00:00

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 100% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions
Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold six-packs of beverage cans together pose a threat to wild animals, which often become entangled in the discarded rings and suffocate as a result. Following our lead, all beverage companies will soon use only those rings consisting of a new plastic that disintegrates after only three days' exposure to sunlight. Once we all complete the switchover from the old to the new plastic rings, therefore, the threat of suffocation that plastic rings pose to wild animals will be eliminated.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the representative's argument?

A. The switchover to the new plastic rings will take at least two more years to complete.
B. After the beverage companies have switched over to the new plastic rings, a substantial number of the old plastic rings will persist in most aquatic and woodland environments.
C. The new plastic rings are slightly less expensive than the old rings.
D. The new plastic rings rarely disintegrate during shipping of beverage six-packs because most trucks that transport canned beverages protect their cargo from sunlight.
E. The new plastic rings disintegrate into substances that are harmful to aquatic animals when ingested in substantial quantities by them.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
The answer key says B is right... i would like to know why D is wrong.......My line of reasoning is this.....since they are not exposed to sunlight,they don't disintegrate ..which implies animals could suffocate and this would weaken the argument.......
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Manager
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 75
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 1

Re: Critical Reasoning Help [#permalink]  27 Apr 2011, 00:50
nashy2098 wrote:
Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold six-packs of beverage cans together pose a threat to wild animals, which often become entangled in the discarded rings and suffocate as a result. Following our lead, all beverage companies will soon use only those rings consisting of a new plastic that disintegrates after only three days' exposure to sunlight. Once we all complete the switchover from the old to the new plastic rings, therefore, the threat of suffocation that plastic rings pose to wild animals will be eliminated.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the representative's argument?

A. The switchover to the new plastic rings will take at least two more years to complete.
B. After the beverage companies have switched over to the new plastic rings, a substantial number of the old plastic rings will persist in most aquatic and woodland environments.
C. The new plastic rings are slightly less expensive than the old rings.
D. The new plastic rings rarely disintegrate during shipping of beverage six-packs because most trucks that transport canned beverages protect their cargo from sunlight.
E. The new plastic rings disintegrate into substances that are harmful to aquatic animals when ingested in substantial quantities by them.

The answer key says B is right... i would like to know why D is wrong.......My line of reasoning is this.....since they are not exposed to sunlight,they don't disintegrate ..which implies animals could suffocate and this would weaken the argument.......

Both B and E looks strong contenders. With E the problem can still be eliminated if rings are not allowed near to aquatic life. so B looks better
VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1368
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 115 [0], given: 10

Re: Critical Reasoning Help [#permalink]  27 Apr 2011, 01:27
nashy2098 wrote:
Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold six-packs of beverage cans together pose a threat to wild animals, which often become entangled in the discarded rings and suffocate as a result. Following our lead, all beverage companies will soon use only those rings consisting of a new plastic that disintegrates after only three days' exposure to sunlight. Once we all complete the switchover from the old to the new plastic rings, therefore, the threat of suffocation that plastic rings pose to wild animals will be eliminated.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the representative's argument?

A. The switchover to the new plastic rings will take at least two more years to complete.-- POE.
B. After the beverage companies have switched over to the new plastic rings, a substantial number of the old plastic rings will persist in most aquatic and woodland environments. -- OA
C. The new plastic rings are slightly less expensive than the old rings. -- out of scope.
D. The new plastic rings rarely disintegrate during shipping of beverage six-packs because most trucks that transport canned beverages protect their cargo from sunlight. -- Argument doesn't talk about transport. POE.
E. The new plastic rings disintegrate into substances that are harmful to aquatic animals when ingested in substantial quantities by them. -- Argument talks about wild animals which may/may not be wild. POE.

The answer key says B is right... i would like to know why D is wrong.......My line of reasoning is this.....since they are not exposed to sunlight,they don't disintegrate ..which implies animals could suffocate and this would weaken the argument.......
---- disintegration while transportation is what is mentioned in the statement.However, the argument talks about disintegration in merely 3 days,which can be in open environment too. Hence POE.

_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Manager
Joined: 03 Apr 2011
Posts: 106
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.54
WE: Military Officer (Military & Defense)
Followers: 4

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

Re: Critical Reasoning Help [#permalink]  27 Apr 2011, 06:22
The representative never claimed that the rings would melt out of sunlight (Choice D). He did however say that there wouldn't be anymore suffocation. Choice B indicates that there still will be after the changeover
Intern
Joined: 17 Apr 2011
Posts: 17
Followers: 0

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

Re: Critical Reasoning Help [#permalink]  28 Apr 2011, 09:22
"a new plastic that disintegrates after only three days' exposure to sunlight".....I interpret that this line implies sunlight causes the disintegration.....Kindly clarify...
Re: Critical Reasoning Help   [#permalink] 28 Apr 2011, 09:22
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold 9 06 Oct 2006, 20:07
Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold 6 05 Jul 2007, 04:19
Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold 7 02 Oct 2008, 07:05
3 Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold 17 11 Sep 2010, 03:00
Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold 9 19 Jul 2011, 22:44
Display posts from previous: Sort by