|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 320
Location: Hungary
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 3
|
In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]
 06 Jun 2008, 07:06
Question Stats:
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 06 Feb 2008
Posts: 90
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
3
[0], given: 0
|
I will go with B author does not say anything quantitatively abt improvement in quality of air,i.e. it may be slight impovement or significant improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 1900
Location: Oklahoma City
Schools: Hard Knocks
Followers: 25
Kudos [?]:
339
[0], given: 32
|
B. zoltan 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.
The first supports his assumption. It uses "almost entirely" rather than saying "entirely". It doesn't make a huge leap.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
The passage says nothing about the quality of the air. The passage merely states that strict air-pollution regualtions resulted in the number of bird species seen in and around London. This goes to far to say "significant" impact, when in realtiy, it might not have taken a significant impact to see an increase in bird species in and around London. Only a marginal increase might have been enough to see a difference in the number of bird species.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
This has to be an assumption or the argument in the stem falls apart. The stem assumes that other cities will have the same result as London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
If this were not an assumption, the stem would not cite this as evidence and then move to saying other cities should enact the same regulatins. If you want thing A to occur, and event B causes thing A to occur, then if you do not want thing A, do not recommend event B.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area. This is an assumption or the correlation between the regulations and sightings is not justified.
_________________
------------------------------------
J Allen Morris
**I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a$$.
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2618
Followers: 13
Kudos [?]:
142
[0], given: 0
|
zoltan 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. D. B is def an assumption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 1900
Location: Oklahoma City
Schools: Hard Knocks
Followers: 25
Kudos [?]:
339
[0], given: 32
|
But D is assuming that the increase is desireable or the regulations are not necessary. GMATBLACKBELT wrote: zoltan 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. D. B is def an assumption. _________________
------------------------------------
J Allen Morris
**I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a$$.
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2618
Followers: 13
Kudos [?]:
142
[0], given: 0
|
jallenmorris wrote: But D is assuming that the increase is desireable or the regulations are not necessary. GMATBLACKBELT wrote: zoltan 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. D. B is def an assumption. I hate this question, we are all wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 1900
Location: Oklahoma City
Schools: Hard Knocks
Followers: 25
Kudos [?]:
339
[0], given: 32
|
I agree. This is a bad question. I think A does exaggerate so it is likely not going to be an assumption, but at the same time, it seems that industry being a significant cause is an assumption for the other parts of the argument to make sense. This is the type of question I shrug my shoulders at and move on. If the authors of the GMAT were so great at taking their own test, wouldn't they too have gone to top 5 b-schools and left the GMAT writing profession behind? Is there truly that much joy in making 3+ months of our lives hell?
_________________
------------------------------------
J Allen Morris
**I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a$$.
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 114
Location: São Paulo
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
What is the OA??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 18 Feb 2008
Posts: 798
Followers: 18
Kudos [?]:
78
[0], given: 25
|
A  did this one at least 3 times already T_T
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 114
Location: São Paulo
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
I can't believe it's not B...
The statement doesn't say anything about the quality of air.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 230
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
12
[0], given: 0
|
Going with A here
"A" puts the onus of air pollution "entirely" on the local industry. If the argument stated that the regulations were imposed only on the local industry then A would have been an assumption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 320
Location: Hungary
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 3
|
OA=A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
