|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1384
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
90
[0], given: 10
|
In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]
 19 Mar 2008, 17:27
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
100% (00:03) 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.
Explain your answers with the "Denial test".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2530
Followers: 41
Kudos [?]:
358
[0], given: 19
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
20 Mar 2008, 09:18
goalsnr wrote: 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.
Explain your answers with the "Denial test". I am not sure of "Denial test" but this what how I do: A. "almost"? not sure. B. it is assumed. C. similar? yes. (D) Desirable? yes. (E) sightings of bird species reflect an actual increase? not sure. so I am in between A and E. "almost" in A is extreme, so A is most linkely.
_________________
Verbal: new-to-the-verbal-forum-please-read-this-first-77546.html
Math: new-to-the-math-forum-please-read-this-first-77764.html
Gmat: everything-you-need-to-prepare-for-the-gmat-revised-77983.html
GT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
Posts: 136
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
8
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
20 Mar 2008, 09:26
goalsnr wrote: 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.
Explain your answers with the "Denial test". (E) the actual number of species doesn't even matter to the arguement. The conclusion is more birds seen in city A, then city B should do that too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 28 Sep 2007
Posts: 215
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
17
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
20 Mar 2008, 11:07
It is A. There is no evidence that pollution is entirely from local business.
E is ok because it talks about the species in the reading. It doesnt matter but it is part of the argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 3594
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Other
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2011
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V40
Followers: 231
Kudos [?]:
1300
[0], given: 346
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
20 Mar 2008, 11:23
A is clearly an assumption here! 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. "Denial test" for A: (A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are not caused by local industry. It destroys the argument. Regulation on local industry will not affect birds in most major cities. Only E remains
_________________
iOS/Android: GMAT ToolKit - The bestselling GMAT prep app | GMAT Club (free) | PrepGame | GRE ToolKit | LSAT ToolKit
PROMO: Are you an exiting GMAT ToolKit (iOS) user? Get GMAT ToolKit 2 (iOS) for free* (read more)
Math: GMAT Math Book ||| General: GMATTimer ||| Chicago Booth: Slide Presentation
The People Who Are Crazy Enough to Think They Can Change the World, Are the Ones Who Do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 28 Sep 2007
Posts: 215
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
17
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
20 Mar 2008, 12:33
whoops. I think your right walker. I carelessly read the question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 3594
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Other
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2011
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V40
Followers: 231
Kudos [?]:
1300
[0], given: 346
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
20 Mar 2008, 12:41
When I saw this question for the fist time, I chose D. Bud this time it is clear for me that "is desirable" => "should be imposed"
_________________
iOS/Android: GMAT ToolKit - The bestselling GMAT prep app | GMAT Club (free) | PrepGame | GRE ToolKit | LSAT ToolKit
PROMO: Are you an exiting GMAT ToolKit (iOS) user? Get GMAT ToolKit 2 (iOS) for free* (read more)
Math: GMAT Math Book ||| General: GMATTimer ||| Chicago Booth: Slide Presentation
The People Who Are Crazy Enough to Think They Can Change the World, Are the Ones Who Do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1384
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
90
[0], given: 10
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
20 Mar 2008, 19:53
I will make an attempt to explain how I reached the answer.
Denial test:
DENY the assumption, and see what effect that has on the argument.It the denial breaks the argument, the assumption is necessary.
Now summarize the argument :
The number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically .Similar strict air pollution laws must be imposed in other cities
A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are NOT caused almost entirely by local industry. ->Doesnot break the conclusion.There could be other sources for pollution.
B) Air-pollution regulations on industry DOES NOT have a significant impact on the quality of the air. ->Then there is no reason to impose the regulations. Breaks the conclusion.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are NOT basically similar to those once suffered by London. ->Then why impose similar laws?Breaks the conclusion
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is NOT desirable. ->same as B.Breaks the conclusion
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London DOES NOT reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area ->That implies th enew regulations did not do any good.Break the conclusion
OA is A
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 3594
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Other
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2011
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V40
Followers: 231
Kudos [?]:
1300
[0], given: 346
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
20 Mar 2008, 21:55
 I disagree with OA! In E the argument claims that the main purpose: increase in the number of bird species seen in and around London Denial test (E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London don't reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area. Why do we need here the actual increase? Maybe birds don't like fly in polluted air as we don't like swim in polluted river. More people - cleaner river but the same number people in the area. What the author is going to reach in the most cities? Increase in the actual number of birds or in the number of seen birds? decrease in pollution --> increase in the number of seen birds --> decrease in pollution works! --> should be implemented in the the most cities. Discussion must go on !  
_________________
iOS/Android: GMAT ToolKit - The bestselling GMAT prep app | GMAT Club (free) | PrepGame | GRE ToolKit | LSAT ToolKit
PROMO: Are you an exiting GMAT ToolKit (iOS) user? Get GMAT ToolKit 2 (iOS) for free* (read more)
Math: GMAT Math Book ||| General: GMATTimer ||| Chicago Booth: Slide Presentation
The People Who Are Crazy Enough to Think They Can Change the World, Are the Ones Who Do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2530
Followers: 41
Kudos [?]:
358
[0], given: 19
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
20 Mar 2008, 22:53
The passage says that the reduced polution caused increase in the no. of bird species seen in and arround london. So, how the passage is measuring the effect of "strict air-polution regulation"? by sightings. if the increase in number of bird species seen does not reflect the actual, then no use of such regulation. therefore, E is assumed. why and how I chose A, its too extream i.e. "almost entirely", which means air-polution by the local industry is the only polution. this is no where assumed and indicated in the passage. therefore, i leaned to A. better explanations are welcomed. goalsnr wrote: 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.
Explain your answers with the "Denial test".
_________________
Verbal: new-to-the-verbal-forum-please-read-this-first-77546.html
Math: new-to-the-math-forum-please-read-this-first-77764.html
Gmat: everything-you-need-to-prepare-for-the-gmat-revised-77983.html
GT
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 3594
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Other
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2011
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V40
Followers: 231
Kudos [?]:
1300
[0], given: 346
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
21 Mar 2008, 00:16
GMAT TIGER wrote: The passage says that the reduced polution caused increase in the no. of bird species seen in and arround london. So, how the passage is measuring the effect of "strict air-polution regulation"? by sightings. if the increase in number of bird species seen does not reflect the actual, then no use of such regulation. therefore, E is assumed.
why and how I chose A, its too extream i.e. "almost entirely", which means air-polution by the local industry is the only polution. this is no where assumed and indicated in the passage. therefore, i leaned to A.
better explanations are welcomed.
Thanks, Tiger. Now I have doubt about my attitude to A but I still disagree in necessity of increase in the actual number of birds...Maybe E helps to exclude possibility of increase in the number of bird species seen in and around London with simultaneous decrease in the actual number of birds.........
_________________
iOS/Android: GMAT ToolKit - The bestselling GMAT prep app | GMAT Club (free) | PrepGame | GRE ToolKit | LSAT ToolKit
PROMO: Are you an exiting GMAT ToolKit (iOS) user? Get GMAT ToolKit 2 (iOS) for free* (read more)
Math: GMAT Math Book ||| General: GMATTimer ||| Chicago Booth: Slide Presentation
The People Who Are Crazy Enough to Think They Can Change the World, Are the Ones Who Do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1384
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
90
[0], given: 10
|
Re: CR-Denial test [#permalink]
21 Mar 2008, 07:35
walker wrote: :evil: I disagree with OA! In E the argument claims that the main purpose: increase in the number of bird species seen in and around London Denial test (E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London don't reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area. Why do we need here the actual increase? Maybe birds don't like fly in polluted air as we don't like swim in polluted river. More people - cleaner river but the same number people in the area. What the author is going to reach in the most cities? Increase in the actual number of birds or in the number of seen birds? decrease in pollution --> increase in the number of seen birds --> decrease in pollution works! --> should be implemented in the the most cities. Discussion must go on ! >>>>>>The increase in the numbers of birds indicate the new regulations are working to improve the quality of air.So it is a valid assumption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: CR-Denial test
[#permalink]
21 Mar 2008, 07:35
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
