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

It is currently 18 Dec 2014, 00:32

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In 1980 there was growing concern that the protective ozone

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
1 KUDOS received
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1634
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Followers: 32

Kudos [?]: 313 [1] , given: 2

In 1980 there was growing concern that the protective ozone [#permalink] New post 24 May 2010, 13:05
1
This post received
KUDOS
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

50% (02:39) correct 50% (01:36) wrong based on 43 sessions
In 1980 there was growing concern that the protective ozone layer over the Antarctic might be decreasing and thereby allowing so much harmful ultraviolet radiation to reach the Earth that polar marine life would be damaged. Some government officials dismissed these concerns, since statistics indicated that global atmospheric ozone levels remained constant.

The relevance of the evidence cited by the government officials in support of their position would be most seriously undermined if it were true that

(A) most species of plant and animal life flourish in warm climates rather than in the polar regions
(B) decreases in the amount of atmospheric Ozone over the Antarctic ice cap tend to be seasonal rather than constant
(C) decreases in the amount of atmospheric ozone were of little concern before l980
(D) quantities of atmospheric ozone shifted away from the polar caps, correspondingly increasing ozone levels in other regions
(E) even where the amount of atmospheric ozone is normal, some ultraviolet light reaches the Earth’s surface
Current Student
avatar
Affiliations: ?
Joined: 20 Jul 2009
Posts: 191
Location: Africa/Europe
Schools: Kellogg; Ross ($$); Tuck
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 6

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 24 May 2010, 14:27
I would go with D
It's the only one tthat try to say that the ozone level is not constant as the statistics seemed to indicate.

What's OA?
1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Affiliations: SPG
Joined: 15 Nov 2006
Posts: 326
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 307 [1] , given: 20

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 25 May 2010, 10:11
1
This post received
KUDOS
I would also go with D.

In B the ozone layer decrease is seasonal which doesn't undermine the official's claim. If we look at it closely, this doesn't state that ozone layer has decrease on Antarctica, rather it says that the decrease is seasonal.

In D, however, we are stating a problem which is the reason why the overall ozone concentration levels have been steady and decreased on Antarctica.
_________________

press kudos, if you like the explanation, appreciate the effort or encourage people to respond.

Download the Ultimate SC Flashcards

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 258
Schools: DukeTuck,Kelogg,Darden
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 45 [0], given: 28

Reviews Badge
Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 25 May 2010, 15:17
In 1980 there was growing concern that the protective ozone layer over the Antarctic might be decreasing and thereby allowing so much harmful ultraviolet radiation to reach the Earth that polar marine life would be damaged. Some government officials dismissed these concerns, since statistics indicated that global atmospheric ozone levels remained constant.

The relevance of the evidence cited by the government officials in support of their position would be most seriously undermined if it were true that

(A) most species of plant and animal life flourish in warm climates rather than in the polar regions
(B) decreases in the amount of atmospheric Ozone over the Antarctic ice cap tend to be seasonal rather than constant
(C) decreases in the amount of atmospheric ozone were of little concern before l980
(D) quantities of atmospheric ozone shifted away from the polar caps, correspondingly increasing ozone levels in other regions
(E) even where the amount of atmospheric ozone is normal, some ultraviolet light reaches the Earth’s surface



Its "D"

The author is concerned over the decrease in the ozone layer over Antarctica, but the officials undermine his claim by sighting to the stat that global ozone layer was constant.

D explains both, supports the author by saying ozone layer shifts and in turn explaining y the officials claim though right is wrong.
_________________

Run towards the things that make you uncomfortable daily. The greatest risk is not taking risks
http://gmatclub.com/forum/from-690-to-730-q50-v38-97356.html

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 04 Apr 2010
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

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

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 25 May 2010, 18:23
IMO D too.

It can't be B coz decrease in ozone is seasonal and not constant has no bearing on the issue at hand. Dunno why I even considered B in the first place. Duh! :lol:

Last edited by GillAS777 on 27 May 2010, 19:33, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 69
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 4

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 25 May 2010, 20:06
GillAS777 wrote:
IMO B

Although both B & D negate constant ozone stats, option B clearly states ozone is not constant. Option D only states that quantities of ozone shift. This quantity may even be negligible. Hence, I feel option B MOST seriously undermines.

Noboru please post OA for your posts. You have us all waiting. Cheers!!

I think its D because D clearly reasons out for both :
1. statistics indicated that global atmospheric ozone levels remained constant.
2. protective ozone layer over the Antarctic might be decreasing

Let me know if my reasoning is Ok
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 15 May 2010
Posts: 27
Followers: 0

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

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 26 May 2010, 03:15
IT's E.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 79
Followers: 1

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

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 26 May 2010, 03:34
IMO D
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Posts: 447
GMAT 1: Q V
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 157

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 26 May 2010, 04:18
noboru wrote:
In 1980 there was growing concern that the protective ozone layer over the Antarctic might be decreasing and thereby allowing so much harmful ultraviolet radiation to reach the Earth that polar marine life would be damaged. Some government officials dismissed these concerns, since statistics indicated that global atmospheric ozone levels remained constant.

The relevance of the evidence cited by the government officials in support of their position would be most seriously undermined if it were true that

(A) most species of plant and animal life flourish in warm climates rather than in the polar regions
(B) decreases in the amount of atmospheric Ozone over the Antarctic ice cap tend to be seasonal rather than constant
(C) decreases in the amount of atmospheric ozone were of little concern before l980
(D) quantities of atmospheric ozone shifted away from the polar caps, correspondingly increasing ozone levels in other regions
(E) even where the amount of atmospheric ozone is normal, some ultraviolet light reaches the Earth’s surface

For me is between B and D


Ans is D

Because If the quantity of ozone shifted from one place and increased at another place then the average would be constant.
_________________

If you found the reply to be helpful, give kudos.

SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1560
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 246 [0], given: 6

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 27 May 2010, 11:53
it is definitely between B and D....and my pick is (D)
BSchool Thread Master
avatar
Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 401
Followers: 20

Kudos [?]: 130 [0], given: 76

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 28 May 2010, 11:05
noboru wrote:
In 1980 there was growing concern that the protective ozone layer over the Antarctic might be decreasing and thereby allowing so much harmful ultraviolet radiation to reach the Earth that polar marine life would be damaged. Some government officials dismissed these concerns, since statistics indicated that global atmospheric ozone levels remained constant.

The relevance of the evidence cited by the government officials in support of their position would be most seriously undermined if it were true that

(A) most species of plant and animal life flourish in warm climates rather than in the polar regions
(B) decreases in the amount of atmospheric Ozone over the Antarctic ice cap tend to be seasonal rather than constant
(C) decreases in the amount of atmospheric ozone were of little concern before l980
(D) quantities of atmospheric ozone shifted away from the polar caps, correspondingly increasing ozone levels in other regions
(E) even where the amount of atmospheric ozone is normal, some ultraviolet light reaches the Earth’s surface

For me is between B and D


For me also is between B and D. However, I think that D is stronger than B.
B apparently contradicts the evidence of the officials, but it doesn't, since they are talking about different places: global vs Antarctic. So it doesn't undermine the evidence of the global constant level of ozone. Also, the decrease tend to be seasonal, so still the officials could say that the negative impact is not permanent. It's not in the passage, but anyways.
D doesn't say anything about season, it could be permanent. It doesn't contradict the evidence of the officials since it agrees that increasing the levels of other regions, then the global level could be constant. But it points that quantities of ozone over the polar caps shifted away to other regions, then not only the evidence is undermined, but the position of the government officials as well.

D is better than B.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 313
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 108 [0], given: 20

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 09 Jul 2010, 21:59
between B and D....and my pick is (D)
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Posts: 171
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 1

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 10 Jul 2010, 03:51
d is better
_________________


R E S P E C T


Finally KISSedGMAT 700 times 450 to 700 An exprience

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Jan 2010
Posts: 194
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 13

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 03 Aug 2010, 23:21
D for me too ............Explanations above are quite satisfactory
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Jun 2010
Posts: 334
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 7

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 11 Aug 2010, 09:38
+1 for D
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Fighting on
Joined: 14 Mar 2010
Posts: 318
Schools: UCLA (R1 interview-WL), UNC(R2--interview-ding) Oxford(R2-Admit), Kelley (R2- Admit $$), McCombs(R2)
WE 1: SE - 1
WE 2: Engineer - 3
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 3

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 11 Aug 2010, 17:41
I will go with D, as this is the only choice that agrees with "atmospheric ozone levels remained constant"
+
undermines the govt explanation about ozone quantity not reducing over polar regions
Expert Post
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 2484
Followers: 341

Kudos [?]: 2881 [0], given: 708

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 05 Aug 2011, 14:09
Expert's post
Director
Director
avatar
Status: Prep started for the n-th time
Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Posts: 707
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 37

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 05 Aug 2011, 21:04
+1 for D.

Crick
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 211
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Technology, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Ross '15, Duke '15
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 7

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 05 Aug 2011, 23:10
IMO D
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 196
Location: United States
Concentration: General Management, International Business
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.6
WE: Project Management (Computer Software)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 7

Re: Antarctic [#permalink] New post 06 Aug 2011, 03:11
+1 D
_________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://gmatclub.com/forum/a-guide-to-the-official-guide-13-for-gmat-review-134210.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Antarctic   [#permalink] 06 Aug 2011, 03:11
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 The ozone layer that protects life on Earth raj44 0 12 Dec 2014, 06:08
1 Experts publish their posts in the topic Concern RaviChandra 2 04 Mar 2010, 02:57
Ozone nitindas 5 21 Jul 2009, 01:28
Ozone arorag 9 31 Aug 2008, 09:54
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In 1980 there was growing concern that the protective ozone

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 24 posts ] 



GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.