|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 263
Location: Kolkata
Schools: La Martiniere for Boys
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
12
[0], given: 9
|
Beverage company representative: The plastic rings that hold [#permalink]
 02 Oct 2008, 08:05
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 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.
Please explain your answer.
OA is B. I thought that it would be D or E. Please explain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1411
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
75
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR Help required [#permalink]
02 Oct 2008, 08:45
rampuria 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. -> Irrelevant ,lets talk about pot switch over effects
(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. -> this is ok but when compared to E i did not find competent enough
(C) The new plastic rings are slightly less expensive than the old rings. -> OOS
(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. -> strengthens the rep's argument
(E) The new plastic rings disintegrate into substances that are harmful to aquatic animals when ingested in substantial quantities by them. -> i found this interesting
Please explain your answer.
OA is B. I thought that it would be D or E. Please explain Looking forward to getting explanation on how B wins over E
_________________
cheers
Its Now Or Never
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2008
Posts: 150
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
30
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR Help required [#permalink]
02 Oct 2008, 09:00
rampuria 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.
Please explain your answer.
OA is B. I thought that it would be D or E. Please explain E looks very tempting, but a closer look clarifies that 'aquatic animals' are out of scope. There is no mention of bags flowing into water bodies. The argument was to protect wild animals & not fishes and ofcourse we cant call fishes as wild animals. Given less than 2 minutes to solve this question, I'd have marked E. Even if I had marked B it'd have been with a lot of guilt & skepticism. A real tricky question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1305
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
57
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR Help required [#permalink]
02 Oct 2008, 09:08
WHt I can make out from B is : the representative thinks that once there z a complete switch over there ill be no threat. BUt B says even after there is complete shift from old to new rings, still there will be a large no of old rings. So the threat is very much there. So B shld be the answer. But honestly speaking I reached this conclusion only after knowing the ans oderwise in exams, I wld hv prompltly chosen E  rampuria 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.
Please explain your answer.
OA is B. I thought that it would be D or E. Please explain
Last edited by ritula on 02 Oct 2008, 09:09, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1411
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
75
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR Help required [#permalink]
02 Oct 2008, 09:09
jatinrai wrote: rampuria 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.
Please explain your answer.
OA is B. I thought that it would be D or E. Please explain E looks very tempting, but a closer look clarifies that 'aquatic animals' are out of scope. There is no mention of bags flowing into water bodies. The argument was to protect wild animals & not fishes and ofcourse we cant call fishes as wild animals. Given less than 2 minutes to solve this question, I'd have marked E. Even if I had marked B it'd have been with a lot of guilt & skepticism. A real tricky question. Even B talks about aquatic animals !!! again E talks about threat due to ingestion of toxic elements !!may be this makes E a weaker option and B scores here saying even though the old to new switch is taken place but still old plastic still prevails !!! hence the threat cannot be obviated or eliminated
_________________
cheers
Its Now Or Never
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 842
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
19
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR Help required [#permalink]
02 Oct 2008, 09:37
its not E because the argument says new plastic rings will prevent suffocation, not death by ingestion
B is the answer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 1003
Followers: 7
Kudos [?]:
40
[0], given: 5
|
Re: CR Help required [#permalink]
02 Oct 2008, 11:13
Man, I chose E in a heartbeat. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 246
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
18
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR Help required [#permalink]
02 Oct 2008, 11:32
IMO B . The reason is already explained by ritula.
Note that the conclusion here is '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. '
Anything that can prove the above statement wrong or hamper the above statement will weaken it.
E is outside the scope of the argument ; only B weakens tha argument by saying that even if the new plastic is in play, the old plastic will still be there, and so the threat to the animals will not be eliminated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: CR Help required
[#permalink]
02 Oct 2008, 11:32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
