If this exceptionally difficult rock-climbing face is limited to....

I'm sorry.. But, How is E providing any support to the conclusion?
Had E said a proportionate number, there could've been some support.

In the given context it is understood that disproportionate refers to more falls by amateur rock climbers who have not taken safety lessons. Also, E is the best option available.

I agree, E could be the correct option..
The conclusion needs something that supports more number of falls.. hence E

OA please?

Sent from my Moto G (4) using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

The answer E doesn't sound right to me because of the word "disproportionate". The argument stated that the high number of accidents is attributed to amateur climbers. And to reduce the accidents, the authority will impose restrictions, thereby limiting the number of amateur climbers to join this difficult climbing. There is implicit assumption here; That is, the number of amateur climbers is currently at least as many as the number of professional climbers. If that's not the case, the intended effect will not exist when implementing the restriction on amateur climbers.
Hence, answer E, in my opinion, actually weaken the argument as it says that although the number of amateur climbers is quite high, the number of accidents is disproportionate to this high number.

My take will be C on this question as it states that many amateur climbers would rather take the required training rather than be excluded from climbing it.

Why I think E is correct

> The authority is trying to impose a ban to reduce the number of falls.. this is given as a conclusion...

NOW

If we consider E, then it supports the ban by stating that , indeed because of these amateur climbers there are so many failed falls and hence we need to put a resrriction...

What do u think??





Sent from my Moto G (4) using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Hi varun,

What makes me perplexing when reading option E is only the word "disproportionate". If we replacing it with "proportionate", will the meaning change?
Without that, answer E would be a typical correct strengthen answer choice.
Conclusion: To have result X, we need to do action Y (future)
Strengthener: Not do action Y then not have result X (current)
Weakener: Not do action Y but still have result X (current)

I think in the current context , the word disproportionate means "too much" ...
E.g; Russian fighters dropped a disproportionate number of bombs in Seria...

Sent from my Moto G (4) using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

OA is E. Hope it helps.
I feel E is the one that strengthens

If this exceptionally difficult rock-climbing face is limited to professional rock-climbers and only those amateur rock-climbers who have received special lessons regarding how to climb this face safely, most amateur rock-climbers who wish to climb here would be forced to climb other, less dangerous rock faces. To reduce the number of unsafe climbs that result in falls, we intend to implement just such a limitation.

Which of the following, if true, would most strongly supports the plan described above?

A)Professional rock-climbers are already required to undergo extensive safety training.
B)The falls from this rock face occur primarily because of the risky climbing practices of professional rock-climbers.
C)Many amateur rock-climbers would rather receive special lessons on climbing this rock face safely than be excluded from climbing it.
D)The number of falls due to dangerous climbing at this rock face has decreased in the recent past.
E)Amateur rock climbers who have not taken safety lessons regarding this rock face account for a disproportionate number of falls from this rock face.



Conclusion: to reduce number of unsafe climbs, implement such a limitation (do not allow amateur rock climbers WITHOUT training)


The clear assumption here is that MOST of the incidents of unsafe climbs are related to amateur climbers.

Choice E states this. So correct.

I was little confused about choice B that 'MANY amateur climbers would take training rather than getting excluded' does not make much sense.
1) because of the presence of word 'many'. It can constitute the whole lot or not.
2) If they take training there would be a decline in unsafe climbs but again 'many'......

I was not very sure with choice C. Thus went for choice E.

I have no issues with the correct choice E. but on what basis do we exclude "C"? why C supports less than E does. As per "C", if climbers would take lesson then the number of unsafe climbs would become less. or if climbers do not like to take lesson and exclude this track and choose a less complex one then for all of them danger from this track is anyway out of question. so where does "C" does not connect well supporting the conclusion? Experts please explain this.

Hey HKD1710 ,

You need to understand the goal plan question very well to be able to eliminate C.

Plan - Let's have the climbing limited to Two categories of people - professional rock-climbers and only those amateur rock-climbers who have received special lessons, so that most of amateur rock-climbers go via different route,.

Goal: To reduce the fall.

Now, our aim is strengthen this plan. Meaning I have to say that yes, limiting it to these two categories will help for sure. I can say either getting lessons helps or being professional helps.

This is what option E did. Hence, it is correct.

But if I talk about option C, it says:

Amateur rock-climbers would find another way to start climbing via the same route (by taking lessons). This has the usage of the word "would". It means we are not certain whether they will actually take the lessons. Hence, it is not strongly supporting our plan that it is going to work.

In addition, option C is saying No, they will take the lessons and go via the same route. Don't you think it is not what we are planning? If they go via the same route, our plan is actually not getting strengthened completely. You are just telling a way to reach the goal. But remember, in a goal plan question, our focus should be on the plan rather than the goal whenever we need to strengthen or weaken the plan.

Does that make sense?

I do not understand why "disproportionate" refers to "too large" and not "too small" in this case? can someone please explain.

It's true that "disproportionate" can be used to refer to something that is either too large or too small, but the latter usage is far less common, and if that meaning is intended, we're likely to see specific language for that (e.g. "disproportionately small").

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.