|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 314
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
32
[0], given: 20
|
Data from satellite photographs of the tropical rain forest [#permalink]
 24 Jul 2010, 02:07
Question Stats:
69% (02:33) correct
30% (02:02) wrong based on 0 sessions
Data from satellite photographs of the tropical rain forest in Melonia show that last year the deforestation rate of this environmentally sensitive zone was significantly lower than in previous years. The Melonian government, which spent millions of dollars last year to enforce laws against burning and cutting of the forest, is claiming that the satellite data indicate that its increased efforts to halt the destruction are proving effective. Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the government’s claim? (A) Landowner opposition to the government’s anti-deforestation efforts grew more violent last year in response to the increased enforcement. (B) Rainfall during the usually dry 6-month annual burning season was abnormally heavy last year. (C) Government agents had to issue fines totaling over $9 million to 3,500 violators of burning-and-cutting regulations. (D) The inaccessibility of much of the rain forest has made it impossible to confirm the satellite data by direct observation from the field. (E) Much of the money that was designated last year for forest preservation has been spent on research and not on enforcement. Please explain the OA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2010
Posts: 117
GPA: 4
WE: Programming (Computer Software)
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
29
[0], given: 33
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
24 Jul 2010, 06:44
Claim:Satellite photos indicate Efforts to halt the destruction are effective. Evidence for the claim: spent millions of dollars in enforcing laws to prevent destruction. Effectively: Dollars spent in enforcing laws --> Deforestration rate is lower (indicated by photos) To Undermine this we have to weaken this argument, we have to prove the laws are ineffective / not enforced. Option (E)
_________________
-If you like my post, consider giving KUDOS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 39
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 1
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
24 Jul 2010, 08:09
rohitgoel15 wrote: Data from satellite photographs of the tropical rain forest in Melonia show that last year the deforestation rate of this environmentally sensitive zone was significantly lower than in previous years. The Melonian government, which spent millions of dollars last year to enforce laws against burning and cutting of the forest, is claiming that the satellite data indicate that its increased efforts to halt the destruction are proving effective.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the government’s claim?
(A) Landowner opposition to the government’s anti-deforestation efforts grew more violent last year in response to the increased enforcement.
(B) Rainfall during the usually dry 6-month annual burning season was abnormally heavy last year.
(C) Government agents had to issue fines totaling over $9 million to 3,500 violators of burning-and-cutting regulations.
(D) The inaccessibility of much of the rain forest has made it impossible to confirm the satellite data by direct observation from the field.
(E) Much of the money that was designated last year for forest preservation has been spent on research and not on enforcement.
Please explain the OA Option B is correct Option E is wrong COnsider this case, government spend millions of dollars on research to find effective ways to curb deforestration. and spend less money on implementation of those ways
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 150
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
13
[0], given: 3
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2010, 01:38
A, C OOS. There4 ruled out E could be a possibility but can be eliminated since the argument exclusively pointed out that Govt spent millions of dollars last year to enforce laws against burning and cutting of the forest. Authentication of satellite data is not required. The scope of the argument is restricted to data from satellite photographs. We can get rif of D. B talks about an alternate reason, which is enough to break the argument.
_________________
consider cudos if you like my post
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 66
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 3
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2010, 01:58
What's wrong with D....
The govt says that the satellite data indicate that its increased efforts to halt the destruction are proving effective. So, Govt is raving just on basis of data from satellite and 'D' doubts on its effectiveness. If data itself is not correct than claim falls.
B just says that rainfall was heavy but dosent say whether govt methods were effective or not as no supporting data is given.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
Posts: 20
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2010, 03:20
B is for me
A-it is neutral
C-I think the information is not enough to determine whether it is strengthen or weaken
D-the paragraph does not mention the inaccessibility of much of the rain forest.
E-it is againt the message of paragraph, because "The Melonian government, which spent millions of dollars last year to enforce laws against burning and cutting......".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
Posts: 58
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
3
[0], given: 10
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2010, 03:33
saorabh wrote: What's wrong with D....
The govt says that the satellite data indicate that its increased efforts to halt the destruction are proving effective. So, Govt is raving just on basis of data from satellite and 'D' doubts on its effectiveness. If data itself is not correct than claim falls.
B just says that rainfall was heavy but dosent say whether govt methods were effective or not as no supporting data is given. We have to weaken the underlying assumption: Assumption: The the sole reason for the lower deforestation rate is the government programm. --> Hence we have to find ANY OTHER REASON (which is given with B). The faulty satellite data may indicate that the prove the government provides to support its claim is wrong, but does not attack the assumption (which is what weaken/strengthen questions are all about). Cheers, André
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 66
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 3
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2010, 07:33
One approach is alternate path of reasoning as you've mentioned but another way is attacking the data upon which whole argument is based. D does that by doubting the validity of conclusion which is solely based on data from satellite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 447
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
25
[0], given: 112
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2010, 08:47
i go with D as well
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 447
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
25
[0], given: 112
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2010, 08:51
LSAT is always weird for me
Be it SC or RC ... and now CR
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 39
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 1
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
03 Aug 2010, 02:09
Source: KAPLAN LSAT EXPLANATIONSwhy Option D is wrong(D) would weaken the idea that deforestation dropped significantly this year by undermining the proof, the photographs, but that’s not what we need to do — we need to weaken the government’s claim.
Last edited by nikhilkatira on 03 Aug 2010, 05:56, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 14 Jun 2010
Posts: 338
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
12
[0], given: 7
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
03 Aug 2010, 05:41
Went for E but satisfied with B!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1570
Followers: 12
Kudos [?]:
121
[0], given: 6
|
Re: satellite photographs [#permalink]
03 Aug 2010, 15:02
B it is.
B gave a reason, which explains that it was the rainfall and not the government enforcement laws that slowed the deforestation rates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: satellite photographs
[#permalink]
03 Aug 2010, 15:02
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
