Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 24 Oct 2014, 09:06

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 899
Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 7

Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical [#permalink] New post 04 Aug 2007, 09:56
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical fertilizers and pesticide in farming is harmful to local wildlife. To produce the same amount of food, however, more land must be under cultivation when organic farming techniques are used than when chemicals are used. Therefore, organic farming leaves less land available as habitat for local wildlife.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the author’s argument depends?

(A) Chemical fertilizers and pesticides pose no health threat to wildlife.
(B) Wildlife living near farms where chemicals are used will not ingest any food or water containing those chemicals.
(C) The only disadvantage to using chemicals in farming is their potential effect on wildlife.
(D) The same crops are grown on organic farms as on farms where chemicals are used.
(E) Land cultivated by organic farming methods no longer constitutes a habitat for wildlife.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 932
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

Re: CR; Crops [#permalink] New post 04 Aug 2007, 11:56
Fistail wrote:
Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical fertilizers and pesticide in farming is harmful to local wildlife. To produce the same amount of food, however, more land must be under cultivation when organic farming techniques are used than when chemicals are used. Therefore, organic farming leaves less land available as habitat for local wildlife.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the author’s argument depends?

(A) Chemical fertilizers and pesticides pose no health threat to wildlife.
(B) Wildlife living near farms where chemicals are used will not ingest any food or water containing those chemicals.
(C) The only disadvantage to using chemicals in farming is their potential effect on wildlife.
(D) The same crops are grown on organic farms as on farms where chemicals are used.
(E) Land cultivated by organic farming methods no longer constitutes a habitat for wildlife.


The author is saying that by not using pesticides, organic farming is meant to protect wildlife but still essentially taking away a bigger chunk of their home by using more land.
I would say the answer is E although I was tempted by C.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 877
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 04 Aug 2007, 18:40
Straight E...The conclusion is about organic farming leaving less land free...so E is irrelevant.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 899
Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 7

Re: CR; Crops [#permalink] New post 05 Aug 2007, 17:40
Fistail wrote:
Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical fertilizers and pesticide in farming is harmful to local wildlife. To produce the same amount of food, however, more land must be under cultivation when organic farming techniques are used than when chemicals are used. Therefore, organic farming leaves less land available as habitat for local wildlife.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the author’s argument depends?

(A) Chemical fertilizers and pesticides pose no health threat to wildlife.
(B) Wildlife living near farms where chemicals are used will not ingest any food or water containing those chemicals.
(C) The only disadvantage to using chemicals in farming is their potential effect on wildlife.
(D) The same crops are grown on organic farms as on farms where chemicals are used.
(E) Land cultivated by organic farming methods no longer constitutes a habitat for wildlife.


Thanks for your responses.

OA is E.
Re: CR; Crops   [#permalink] 05 Aug 2007, 17:40
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
5 Experts publish their posts in the topic Organizers claimed that the rally for public health care mikemcgarry 7 01 May 2013, 09:48
Labor organizers claim that unions benefit both their kimmyg 11 18 Oct 2005, 06:55
1 Professor Jones has claimed that chemical compound Praetorian 17 22 Jul 2005, 10:08
Organic farmers are looking for non-chemical methods to rid saurya_s 4 02 Feb 2005, 06:27
Organic farmers are looking for non-chemical methods to rid qhoc0010 7 09 Jan 2005, 07:49
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.