The importance of the ozone layer to terrestrial animals is that it en

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

When reading the stimulus, your eye should be drawn to the modifier and indicator words, which are underlined below: The scope of the stimulus is relatively broad, and aside from the word “entirely,” most of the modifiers are not absolute. Now, look at the rest of the problem and see how several of the answer choices attempt to prey upon those who did not read the stimulus closely. Here are the question stem and corresponding answer choices for the stimulus above: With the previous discussion in mind, let us analyze the
answer choices:

Answer choice (A): The very first word—“all”—should be a red flag. Nowhere in the stimulus do we have support for stating that all damaging wavelengths are filtered out by the ozone layer. The stimulus only states that the ozone layer filters “some” wavelengths and lets others through. Some of those that are filtered are dangerous, as indicated by the last sentence. Surprisingly, about 10% of all test takers select this answer choice.

Answer choice (B): We know that many animal species could suffer severe eye damage, and from this we can infer that some of them live in areas threatened by the ozone layer. We do not know that few of the species live in non- threatened areas. Do not forget the Fact Test—it will eliminate any answer choice without support.

Answer choice (C): Nothing in the passage proves this answer choice. If you selected this answer thinking that “many” implied “not all,” then you made a simple, correctable mistake. “Many” can include “all.”

Answer choice (D): Again, watch those modifiers! One reason the answer choice is incorrect is because it references “most” species when the stimulus only discusses “many” species.

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer. We can follow the chain of connections in the stimulus to prove this answer: the ozone layer filters some wavelengths of light; holes in the ozone layer are dangerous, but one previously overlooked danger of the holes is possible eye damage for many species. From these two statements we can infer that the holes must be letting some damaging wavelengths of light through. This is essentially what answer choice (E) states.

The lesson from this question is simple: read closely and pay strict attention to the modifiers used by the author. Even though you must read quickly, the test makers expect you to know exactly what was said, and they will include answer choices specifically designed to test whether you understood the details.

(E)

(A) All wavelengths of sunlight that can cause eye damage are filtered out by the ozone layer where it is intact
- it entirely filters out some wavelengths of light but lets others through
(B) Few species of animals live on a part of the earth’s surface that is not threatened by holes in the ozone layer. - No mention of any parts of earth's surface
(C) Some species of animals have eyes that will not suffer any damage when exposed to unfiltered sunlight.
- these holes could lead to severe eye damage for animals of many species. Holes can lead to small damages.
(D) A single wavelength of sunlight can cause severe damage to the eyes of most species of animals.
- No mention of specific wavelenths
(E) Some wavelengths of sunlight that cause eye damage are more likely to reach the earth’s surface where there are holes in the ozone layer than where there are not. --> Correct

Here,s my explaination::

The importance of the ozone layer to terrestrial animals is that it entirely filters out some wavelengths of light but lets others through. Holes in the ozone layer and the dangers associated with these holes are well documented. However, one danger that has not been given sufficient attention is that these holes could lead to severe eye damage for animals of many species.

Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the statements above, if they are true?

MUST BE TRUE question type by reading the stem.

(A) All wavelengths of sunlight that can cause eye damage are filtered out by the ozone layer where it is intact.
Eliminate: Extreme language.
(B) Few species of animals live on a part of the earth’s surface that is not threatened by holes in the ozone layer.
Eliminate: Goes out of scope.
(C) Some species of animals have eyes that will not suffer any damage when exposed to unfiltered sunlight.
Eliminate: No evidence is presented in the stimulus to prove this point.
(D) A single wavelength of sunlight can cause severe damage to the eyes of most species of animals.
Eliminate: Most is never equal to Many( as Powerscore says) . Most = 50 or above...but Many can include ALL.
(E) Some wavelengths of sunlight that cause eye damage are more likely to reach the earth’s surface where there are holes in the ozone layer than where there are not.
Perfect: This one is basically a paraphrase of a line in the stimulus.

Hope it helps.

Thanks,
-V

+1 E

Yes, "all" MAY include "many".
For example, if you have 100 balls, "many" could be 50 or 100 balls. In both cases, they are a lot! It is an ambiguous term. In this sense, you must be careful of what "many" could mean.

However, I think that " many " is not critical to eliminate C. "Any" is most important in that choice.

I think I deserve kudos

Straight E. As you may know by now, the correct answers to Inference questions are typically qualified and sometimes restrictive, and avoid making sweeping statements.

Boundary words such as "some" "likely" can be good indicators of the right answer to Inference questions. E can be adequately inferred by using the given premises without resorting to external informal.

Cheers,
Der alte Fritz.

The key thing here to note is the phrase "severe eye damage"

The importance of the ozone layer to terrestrial animals is that it entirely filters out some wavelengths of light but lets others through. Holes in the ozone layer and the dangers associated with these holes are well documented. However, one danger that has not been given sufficient attention is that these holes could lead to severe eye damage for animals of many species.

Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the statements above, if they are true?

A. All wavelengths of sunlight that can cause eye damage are filtered out by the ozone layer where it is intact.Close but flawed.No one said that other wavelengths cannot cause damage, Its just that they can't cause severe damage.So all the wavelengths need not be filtered out.
B. Few species of animals live on a part of the earth’s surface that is not threatened by holes in the ozone layer.Can't say. Maybe more live maybe not
C. Some species of animals have eyes that will not suffer any damage when exposed to unfiltered sunlight.Is not supported by above statements
D. A single wavelength of sunlight can cause severe damage to the eyes of most species of animals.Not supported
E. Some wavelengths of sunlight that cause eye damage are more likely to reach the earth’s surface where there are holes in the ozone layer than where there are not.
True, ozone filters some of the wavelengths, so the rays are more likely to reach the surface of earth where there are holes in the surface of earth.

(A) All wavelengths of sunlight that can cause eye damage are filtered out by the ozone layer where it is intact. - Reject, nothing is said about filtering when ozone is intact, also all wave length is kinda huge jump, coz their might be come harmful light that effect the eye passing through
(B) Few species of animals live on a part of the earth’s surface that is not threatened by holes in the ozone layer. - Plain reject.
(C) Some species of animals have eyes that will not suffer any damage when exposed to unfiltered sunlight.- This was a nice contender for me, but i rejected it coz i dont know anything about other animal. All i have been told is some get eye problem.
(D) A single wavelength of sunlight can cause severe damage to the eyes of most species of animals. - Single, nah, reject.
(E) Some wavelengths of sunlight that cause eye damage are more likely to reach the earth’s surface where there are holes in the ozone layer than where there are not. - This is totally fine !!, everything is given in the passage.

(A) All wavelengths of sunlight that can cause eye damage are filtered out by the ozone layer where it is intact. Extreme

(B) Few species of animals live on a part of the earth’s surface that is not threatened by holes in the ozone layer. Not mentioned in the passage

(C) Some species of animals have eyes that will not suffer any damage when exposed to unfiltered sunlight. No support from the passage

(D) A single wavelength of sunlight can cause severe damage to the eyes of most species of animals. No info

(E) Some wavelengths of sunlight that cause eye damage are more likely to reach the earth’s surface where there are holes in the ozone layer than where there are not.


(E)

The importance of the ozone layer to terrestrial animals is that it entirely filters out some wavelengths of light but lets others through. Holes in the ozone layer and the dangers associated with these holes are well documented. However, one danger that has not been given sufficient attention is that these holes could lead to severe eye damage for animals of many species.

Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the statements above, if they are true?
----------------

It is an inference question.


(A) All wavelengths of sunlight that can cause eye damage are filtered out by the ozone layer where it is intact.
All - too extreme

(B) Few species of animals live on a part of the earth’s surface that is not threatened by holes in the ozone layer.
Few - we can not know that

(C) Some species of animals have eyes that will not suffer any damage when exposed to unfiltered sunlight.
Sounds not bad, but "any damage" sounds too extreme

(D) A single wavelength of sunlight can cause severe damage to the eyes of most species of animals.
Single - too extreme

(E) Some wavelengths of sunlight that cause eye damage are more likely to reach the earth’s surface where there are holes in the ozone layer than where there are not.
Sounds good

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.