Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]
05 Aug 2006, 16:14
0% (00:00) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.
I think I'll go with A here. The phrase 'almost entirely' is what leads me to make this selection.
I'm not really thrilled about the answer choices though, because it's hard to ascertain the relevance of points raised in B & C. For example B doesn't say 'local industry' as is referred to in other parts of the passage. For C, the passage doesn't say whether air polution problems must be similar for air-pollution regulations to have an effect.
Where did this question come from? And what is the OA/OE?