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

 It is currently 05 May 2016, 10:30

### 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

# In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 237
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 266 [3] , given: 63

In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 06:31
3
KUDOS
15
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

35% (02:24) correct 65% (01:13) wrong based on 810 sessions

### HideShow timer Statictics

In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the United States has been cut in half. The decline is due primarily to the increasing use of pesticides in the United States, as well as to the introduction of two types of mites that weaken and kill the bees. Honeybees are the primary pollinators for a variety of important fruit crops, including oranges, apples, grapes, peaches, cranberries and watermelons. Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers.

In evaluating the conclusion, which of the following questions would be LEAST useful to answer?

A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee?
B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand?
C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees?
D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations?
E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination?
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by nelz007 on 14 Nov 2012, 09:19, edited 1 time in total.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 6488
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 1761

Kudos [?]: 10512 [5] , given: 207

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 20:28
5
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
nelz007 wrote:
In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the United States has been cut in half. The decline is due primarily to the increasing use of pesticides in the United States, as well as to the introduction of two types of mites that weaken and kill the bees. Honeybees are the primary pollinators for a variety of important fruit crops, including oranges, apples, grapes, peaches, cranberries and watermelons. Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers.

In evaluating the conclusion, which of the following questions would be LEAST useful to answer?

A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee?
B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand?
C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees?
D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations?
E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination?

Responding to 3 pms on this question!

I couldn't recall the honeybee question offhand but was convinced that it must be tricky if people are this unsettled because of it. But mind you, in my opinion, the question is straightforward. All you need to do is focus on what the question is asking you. Do not let emotions interfere!

In all our strengthen/weaken questions we tell you to look at the conclusion. Try to strengthen/weaken that. Here the question clearly asks you to figure out what will not help in evaluating the CONCLUSION.

What is the conclusion?

"If the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers."

The conclusion is that if the honey bee population continues to decline, then consumers will not get fruit. What you have to evaluate is this "If the honeybee population continues to decline, will the consumers get fruit?". Basically, we are wondering whether there are alternative ways of pollination or getting fruit.

A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee?
Alternative method of pollination

B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand?
Alternative method of obtaining fruit

C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees?
Alternative method of pollination

D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations?
Doesn't help in evaluating the conclusion. The conclusion clearly says that if the decline continues, fruits will not be available. We don't have to question whether there are ways to reverse the decline. The point is - if the decline happens, can we do something.

E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination?
Alternative method of obtaining fruit

_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199 Veritas Prep Reviews Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor Joined: 16 Oct 2010 Posts: 6488 Location: Pune, India Followers: 1761 Kudos [?]: 10512 [3] , given: 207 Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink] ### Show Tags 15 Nov 2012, 01:28 3 This post received KUDOS Expert's post Vips0000 wrote: How does A give you an alternative for polliation? if bee population is declining due to pesticide, can we turn a blind eye to the fact that pesticides would eliminate insects too? And assume that we got one way of pollination? We do not know whether the insects get affected. It's an 'evaluate' question. You first evaluate whether someone else can pollinate. Once you find someone, then you will evaluate the status of those insects and what affects them etc. You are jumping the gun by saying that the same pesticides will affect every species of insects and hence no other possible pollinator can survive. Vips0000 wrote: Also the statement: D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations? Doesn't help in evaluating the conclusion. The conclusion clearly says that if the decline continues, fruits will not be available. We don't have to question whether there are ways to reverse the decline. The point is - if the decline happens, can we do something. "The conclusion clearly says that if the decline continues, fruits will not be available". yes it does. And that is what we have to evaluate. We dont have to question if there are ways to reverse the decline. But 'consider'- if there is a method that can 'reverse' (note:reverse, Not STOP) the decline, would it impact the conclusion? Here you haven't understood the conclusion. Say, I give you my opinion "If people keep fighting, the world will end." You need to evaluate my opinion. What will you evaluate? Will you evaluate whether people will keep fighting or will you evaluate what happens when people keep fighting. In my opinion, if people keep fighting, the world will end. You need to find out what happens 'if people keep fighting'. My opinion is based on a condition. If this happens, that will happen. When you evaluate my opinion, you are going to evaluate whether 'that will happen or not if this happens'. You don't have to question whether people will keep fighting or not. Similarly, the conclusion states 'if honeybee population continues to decline...' Don't worry about whether actually honeybee population will decline, stay same or increase. Find out what happens if it continues to decline. _________________ Karishma Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor My Blog Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 237
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 266 [2] , given: 63

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:13
2
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Vips0000 wrote:
nelz007 wrote:
This was a very confusing question. The official answer is D.

How could it be D?
what is the explanation given?

here's the explanation:

This is a type of weaken question that asks the test-taker to provide the question that would, when answered, either strengthen or weaken the conclusion. In this exception question, the correct answer will be the question that is not useful in evaluating the conclusion. Choice D is the correct answer because it is the one that is not directly focused on the conclusion, which is the prediction that most fruits will be unavailable in the absence of the honeybees. Choice D poses a very important question about a possible way to reverse the decline in the honeybee population, but the answer to this question would neither strengthen nor weaken the conclusion. Choices A and C ask about potential alternative ways to pollinate the fruit, while Choice E presents the possibility that pollination could be bypassed through genetic engineering. Choice B asks about other fruit-producing regions that might be used as alternative sources of fruit for consumers.
Director
Status: Done with formalities.. and back..
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 647
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Olin - Wash U - Class of 2015
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 472 [1] , given: 23

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 08:54
1
KUDOS
nelz007 wrote:
In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the United States has been cut in half. The decline is due primarily to the increasing use of pesticides in the United States, as well as to the introduction of two types of mites that weaken and kill the bees. Honeybees are the primary pollinators for a variety of important fruit crops, including oranges, apples, grapes, peaches, cranberries and watermelons. Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers.

In evaluating the conclusion, which of the following questions would be LEAST useful to answer?

A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee?
B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand?
C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees?
D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations?
E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination?

Conclusion is: if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers.
Lets see each choice one by one.

A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee?
Even if the ans to this question is yes, chances are pesticides would eliminate those insects as well. note, we are evaluating this conclusion in the light of decline in bee population due to pesticides.
Therefore yes or no in this question does not matter in evaluating the argument.

B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand?
conclusion is that most fruits will no longer be available to customer. If the ans to this question is no that means there will be pollination and there will be fruits. if ans to this question is yes then we know that conclusion holds good. So this question helps.

C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees?
Yes/no to this question provides alternate method of pollination. if yes ->pollination -> fruits. if no -> no pollination -> no fruit. So this question helps.

D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations?
yes would mean if population continues to decline we can reverse the trend.-> continue pollination->fruits!
no would mean we can not reverse the trend -> no pollination->no fruits.

E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination?[/
in this choice we are just eliminating middle man pollination of our other answer choices.. yes->fruits, no->no fruits.

Hence ans A it is.
_________________

Lets Kudos!!!
Black Friday Debrief

VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1420
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Followers: 164

Kudos [?]: 1047 [1] , given: 62

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:17
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
nelz007 wrote:
In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the United States has been cut in half. The decline is due primarily to the increasing use of pesticides in the United States, as well as to the introduction of two types of mites that weaken and kill the bees. Honeybees are the primary pollinators for a variety of important fruit crops, including oranges, apples, grapes, peaches, cranberries and watermelons. Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers.

In evaluating the conclusion, which of the following questions would be LEAST useful to answer?

A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee?
B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand?
C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees?
D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations?
E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination?

Not convinced with the OA given.
I feel the answer must be B.
A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee? YES Then fruits can be easily pollinated despite the decline in the number of honeybees. NO The decline will continue and in futute most of the fruits will be unavailable.
B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand? We are concerned with the fruits in America. Who cares about Chile and New Zealand.
C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees? YES If humans can pollinate the fruits, then fruits can be pollinated and in such a case conclusion weakens. NO If humans also are unable to pollinate, then surely the fruits will decline. Strengthens
D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations? YES Then decline can be eliminated by reducing the use of pesticides. Weakens the argument NO So reduction of pesticide usage is also not going to help the fruits anyways. Strengthens the argument.
E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination? YES If we can genetically engineer the fruit producing plants, then one may never feel short of fruits in America. Weakens the argument. NO Strengthens the argument.
Are you sure about the OA?
_________________
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 298
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 185 [1] , given: 32

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:39
1
KUDOS
Vips0000 wrote:

True, option A looks for potential alternatives for pollination. But it looks for "insect pollination". But even if we find insect X, Y or Z - we still need to evaluate and find out if those insects would not be affected because of pesticides. This definitely can not help in evaluating the argument.
As far as D is concerned - it is not talking about stopping the trend - but it talks about reversal of trend. What it means is if we reduce pesticide bee population will increase -> which shows pollination would happen again -> consumer can get fruits. So it weakens argument when answered in affirmative.

The OE is definitely not correct.

I guess D is correct answer because the conclusion states "Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers."
That is -> the conclusion is contingent on the basis only when "honey bee population continues this drastic decline". Per D, if we can reverse or not reverse the trend is irrelevant to issue of getting fruits (given the bees continue to decline)
In other words, we have evaluate all the answer choice considering what will happen if the trend continues.

Makes sense?

Cheers

cheers
Intern
Joined: 24 Sep 2012
Posts: 6
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V38
GPA: 2.93
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 14 [1] , given: 8

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 13:37
1
KUDOS
For D, even if we account for the pesticide we would probably need to account for the mites as well to be definitive.

But I think it comes down to the condition of the argument, that we should accept the decline as given.
Director
Joined: 05 Sep 2010
Posts: 845
Followers: 75

Kudos [?]: 208 [1] , given: 60

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Jun 2014, 19:10
1
KUDOS
Quote:
gauravkaushik8591 wrote: and i just couldn't understand how would pollinating a fruit that has been pollinated by bees help? as in, isn't it already pollinated?

you are not parsing the option C correctly

C is trying to look out for a possibility where in the plants that are presently being pollinated by honeybees CAN be pollinated by humans ?
Intern
Joined: 04 Aug 2013
Posts: 29
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
GMAT 1: 740 Q47 V46
GPA: 3.23
WE: Consulting (Real Estate)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [1] , given: 12

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2015, 08:57
1
KUDOS
Marcab wrote:
nelz007 wrote:
In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the United States has been cut in half. The decline is due primarily to the increasing use of pesticides in the United States, as well as to the introduction of two types of mites that weaken and kill the bees. Honeybees are the primary pollinators for a variety of important fruit crops, including oranges, apples, grapes, peaches, cranberries and watermelons. Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers.

In evaluating the conclusion, which of the following questions would be LEAST useful to answer?

A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee?
B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand?
C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees?
D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations?
E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination?

Not convinced with the OA given.
I feel the answer must be B.
A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee? YES Then fruits can be easily pollinated despite the decline in the number of honeybees. NO The decline will continue and in futute most of the fruits will be unavailable.
B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand? We are concerned with the fruits in America. Who cares about Chile and New Zealand.
C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees? YES If humans can pollinate the fruits, then fruits can be pollinated and in such a case conclusion weakens. NO If humans also are unable to pollinate, then surely the fruits will decline. Strengthens
D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations? YES Then decline can be eliminated by reducing the use of pesticides. Weakens the argument NO So reduction of pesticide usage is also not going to help the fruits anyways. Strengthens the argument.
E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination? YES If we can genetically engineer the fruit producing plants, then one may never feel short of fruits in America. Weakens the argument. NO Strengthens the argument.
Are you sure about the OA?

This is a classic trap on hard CR questions...for B, nowhere does it say that we are only concerned with fruits in America. We are concerned with the availability of "most fruits" to consumers. So intuitively, if we knew about supply coming from other fruit producing regions, we would know more about the availability of "most fruit". Agree that D isn't a perfect answer, but recognizing B is a trap makes finding the real answer a lot easier.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 6488
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 1761

Kudos [?]: 10512 [1] , given: 207

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2015, 21:40
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
HCalum11 wrote:
Marcab wrote:
nelz007 wrote:
In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the United States has been cut in half. The decline is due primarily to the increasing use of pesticides in the United States, as well as to the introduction of two types of mites that weaken and kill the bees. Honeybees are the primary pollinators for a variety of important fruit crops, including oranges, apples, grapes, peaches, cranberries and watermelons. Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers.

In evaluating the conclusion, which of the following questions would be LEAST useful to answer?

A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee?
B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand?
C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees?
D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations?
E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination?

Not convinced with the OA given.
I feel the answer must be B.
A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee? YES Then fruits can be easily pollinated despite the decline in the number of honeybees. NO The decline will continue and in futute most of the fruits will be unavailable.
B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand? We are concerned with the fruits in America. Who cares about Chile and New Zealand.
C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees? YES If humans can pollinate the fruits, then fruits can be pollinated and in such a case conclusion weakens. NO If humans also are unable to pollinate, then surely the fruits will decline. Strengthens
D Will reducing the use of pesticides in the United States reverse the decline in honeybee populations? YES Then decline can be eliminated by reducing the use of pesticides. Weakens the argument NO So reduction of pesticide usage is also not going to help the fruits anyways. Strengthens the argument.
E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination? YES If we can genetically engineer the fruit producing plants, then one may never feel short of fruits in America. Weakens the argument. NO Strengthens the argument.
Are you sure about the OA?

This is a classic trap on hard CR questions...for B, nowhere does it say that we are only concerned with fruits in America. We are concerned with the availability of "most fruits" to consumers. So intuitively, if we knew about supply coming from other fruit producing regions, we would know more about the availability of "most fruit". Agree that D isn't a perfect answer, but recognizing B is a trap makes finding the real answer a lot easier.

You are spot on where (B) is concerned.
But (D) is the perfect answer. There can be no debate on it. The moment I will read it, I will mark it. I might not even take a look at (E) anymore. Look at my explanation given to Divya just two posts above yours.
Understanding that (D) is perfect is one of the core skills required in GMAT CR.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 237
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 266 [0], given: 63

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:09
This was a very confusing question. The official answer is D.
Director
Status: Done with formalities.. and back..
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 647
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Olin - Wash U - Class of 2015
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 472 [0], given: 23

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:11
nelz007 wrote:
This was a very confusing question. The official answer is D.

How could it be D?
what is the explanation given?
_________________

Lets Kudos!!!
Black Friday Debrief

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 237
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 266 [0], given: 63

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:19
I just pasted the official explanation that was provided before your post..
VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1420
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Followers: 164

Kudos [?]: 1047 [0], given: 62

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:20
Expert's post
Gotcha B.
But I just evaluated D and I feel, that too, successfully.
_________________
Director
Status: Done with formalities.. and back..
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 647
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Olin - Wash U - Class of 2015
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 472 [0], given: 23

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:28
nelz007 wrote:
Vips0000 wrote:
nelz007 wrote:
This was a very confusing question. The official answer is D.

How could it be D?
what is the explanation given?

here's the explanation:

This is a type of weaken question that asks the test-taker to provide the question that would, when answered, either strengthen or weaken the conclusion. In this exception question, the correct answer will be the question that is not useful in evaluating the conclusion. Choice D is the correct answer because it is the one that is not directly focused on the conclusion, which is the prediction that most fruits will be unavailable in the absence of the honeybees. Choice D poses a very important question about a possible way to reverse the decline in the honeybee population, but the answer to this question would neither strengthen nor weaken the conclusion. Choices A and C ask about potential alternative ways to pollinate the fruit, while Choice E presents the possibility that pollination could be bypassed through genetic engineering. Choice B asks about other fruit-producing regions that might be used as alternative sources of fruit for consumers.

I doubt if the OE is correct.

True, option A looks for potential alternatives for pollination. But it looks for "insect pollination". But even if we find insect X, Y or Z - we still need to evaluate and find out if those insects would not be affected because of pesticides. This definitely can not help in evaluating the argument.
As far as D is concerned - it is not talking about stopping the trend - but it talks about reversal of trend. What it means is if we reduce pesticide bee population will increase -> which shows pollination would happen again -> consumer can get fruits. So it weakens argument when answered in affirmative.

The OE is definitely not correct.
_________________

Lets Kudos!!!
Black Friday Debrief

VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1420
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Followers: 164

Kudos [?]: 1047 [0], given: 62

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:48
Expert's post
Jp27 wrote:
Vips0000 wrote:

True, option A looks for potential alternatives for pollination. But it looks for "insect pollination". But even if we find insect X, Y or Z - we still need to evaluate and find out if those insects would not be affected because of pesticides. This definitely can not help in evaluating the argument.
As far as D is concerned - it is not talking about stopping the trend - but it talks about reversal of trend. What it means is if we reduce pesticide bee population will increase -> which shows pollination would happen again -> consumer can get fruits. So it weakens argument when answered in affirmative.

The OE is definitely not correct.

I guess D is correct answer because the conclusion states "Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers."
That is -> the conclusion is contingent on the basis only when "honey bee population continues this drastic decline". Per D, if we can reverse or not reverse the trend is irrelevant to issue of getting fruits (given the bees continue to decline)
In other words, we have evaluate all the answer choice considering what will happen if the trend continues.

Makes sense?

Cheers

cheers

But won't reversing the trend halt the continuation of the decline in the number of fruits available to consumers in America, given the fact that honeybees are the pollinators.
Am I missing something?
_________________
Director
Status: Done with formalities.. and back..
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 647
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Olin - Wash U - Class of 2015
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 472 [0], given: 23

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:52
Jp27 wrote:
Vips0000 wrote:

True, option A looks for potential alternatives for pollination. But it looks for "insect pollination". But even if we find insect X, Y or Z - we still need to evaluate and find out if those insects would not be affected because of pesticides. This definitely can not help in evaluating the argument.
As far as D is concerned - it is not talking about stopping the trend - but it talks about reversal of trend. What it means is if we reduce pesticide bee population will increase -> which shows pollination would happen again -> consumer can get fruits. So it weakens argument when answered in affirmative.

The OE is definitely not correct.

I guess D is correct answer because the conclusion states "Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers."
That is -> the conclusion is contingent on the basis only when "honey bee population continues this drastic decline". Per D, if we can reverse or not reverse the trend is irrelevant to issue of getting fruits (given the bees continue to decline)
In other words, we have evaluate all the answer choice considering what will happen if the trend continues.

Makes sense?

Cheers

cheers

Not really!

Yes conclusion is -
"if bee population continues to decline-> most fruits will no longer be available to consumers"

most basic logical meaning of this?
if population doesnt decline (or increase -reversing the trend!) -> fruits may be available to consumers.
Which is option D. So it matters!

_________________

Lets Kudos!!!
Black Friday Debrief

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 298
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 185 [0], given: 32

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 09:59
Marcab wrote:
Jp27 wrote:
Vips0000 wrote:

True, option A looks for potential alternatives for pollination. But it looks for "insect pollination". But even if we find insect X, Y or Z - we still need to evaluate and find out if those insects would not be affected because of pesticides. This definitely can not help in evaluating the argument.
As far as D is concerned - it is not talking about stopping the trend - but it talks about reversal of trend. What it means is if we reduce pesticide bee population will increase -> which shows pollination would happen again -> consumer can get fruits. So it weakens argument when answered in affirmative.

The OE is definitely not correct.

I guess D is correct answer because the conclusion states "Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers."
That is -> the conclusion is contingent on the basis only when "honey bee population continues this drastic decline". Per D, if we can reverse or not reverse the trend is irrelevant to issue of getting fruits (given the bees continue to decline)
In other words, we have evaluate all the answer choice considering what will happen if the trend continues.

Makes sense?

Cheers

cheers

But won't reversing the trend halt the continuation of the decline in the number of fruits available to consumers in America, given the fact that honeybees are the pollinators.
Am I missing something?

But you are answering the wrong question!
Question here is Will american get fruits, despite the decline of bees?
See how the other answer choices work.

A Are there other insect pollinators that could pollinate these fruit crops instead of the honeybee?
if Other insect can pollinate then we will get fruits, let the bees die

B Are honeybee populations declining in other important fruit-producing regions, like Chile and New Zealand?
we will get fruits from other counties, who cares abt the bees!

C Is it feasible for humans to hand-pollinate the fruits that have been pollinated by bees?
humans can hand-pollinate so we can get fruits, we dont need bees anymore to pollinate

E Is it possible to genetically engineer fruit-producing plants so that they no longer require pollination?
fruit no longer need pollination, no use of bees.

See the trend sir?
When I say "If i go the party, I will get drunk"
In evaluating "will I get drunk?, There is no point question whether I will go to the party!

Cheers
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 298
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 185 [0], given: 32

Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 10:07
Vips0000 wrote:
Jp27 wrote:
Vips0000 wrote:

True, option A looks for potential alternatives for pollination. But it looks for "insect pollination". But even if we find insect X, Y or Z - we still need to evaluate and find out if those insects would not be affected because of pesticides. This definitely can not help in evaluating the argument.
As far as D is concerned - it is not talking about stopping the trend - but it talks about reversal of trend. What it means is if we reduce pesticide bee population will increase -> which shows pollination would happen again -> consumer can get fruits. So it weakens argument when answered in affirmative.

The OE is definitely not correct.

I guess D is correct answer because the conclusion states "Therefore, if the honey bee population continues this drastic decline, then most fruits will no longer be available to consumers."
That is -> the conclusion is contingent on the basis only when "honey bee population continues this drastic decline". Per D, if we can reverse or not reverse the trend is irrelevant to issue of getting fruits (given the bees continue to decline)
In other words, we have evaluate all the answer choice considering what will happen if the trend continues.

Makes sense?

Cheers

cheers

Not really!

Yes conclusion is -
"if bee population continues to decline-> most fruits will no longer be available to consumers"

most basic logical meaning of this?
if population doesnt decline (or increase -reversing the trend!) -> fruits may be available to consumers.
Which is option D. So it matters!

This (bolded) is wrong logic
If I'm in Pasir Ris New Town then I'm in Singapore.
From this you conclude ->
If Im NOT in Pasir Ris New Town then I'm NOT in Singapore -

Clearly wrong. I could be at some other place in Singapore such as Ang Mo Kio
Correct Inference is
If im NOT in Singapore then I'm Definitely NOT in Pasir Ris New Town -> this is the correct inference.

Now?
Re: In the past 50 years, the population of honeybees in the   [#permalink] 14 Nov 2012, 10:07

Go to page    1   2   3   4    Next  [ 64 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Over the past ten years, the population of Dismaston has grown five ti 1 15 Aug 2015, 19:59
2 Over the past ten years, the population of Dismaston has grown five ti 1 09 Jun 2015, 12:56
10 Over the past ten years, the population of Dismiston has grown five ti 3 04 Sep 2014, 21:03
6 Over the past ten years, the population of Dismaston has gro 5 04 Mar 2014, 05:40
8 Over the past ten years, the population of Dismaston 14 13 Dec 2013, 07:19
Display posts from previous: Sort by