Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 16:10 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 16:10
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
705-805 Level|   Weaken|         
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,355
Own Kudos:
778,072
 [3]
Given Kudos: 99,964
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,355
Kudos: 778,072
 [3]
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,355
Own Kudos:
778,072
 [2]
Given Kudos: 99,964
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,355
Kudos: 778,072
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
siddhantvarma
Joined: 12 May 2024
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 539
Own Kudos:
715
 [2]
Given Kudos: 196
GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q87 V82 DI75
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q87 V82 DI75
Posts: 539
Kudos: 715
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
MKeerthu
Joined: 12 Mar 2024
Last visit: 02 Apr 2025
Posts: 53
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 22
Posts: 53
Kudos: 59
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The answer is option D.

we need to find an answer that would say no-tilling is not suitable for soil health.

Option A and B supports the argument.
Option C does not talk about the soil health. It was bit tricky to eliminate it.
Option D - The soil health was not good due to no-tilling and thus the machineries were suggested to the farmers.
Option E - supports the argument by saying tilling is also good
User avatar
shoaibshariff07
Joined: 05 Jun 2024
Last visit: 12 Nov 2025
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 266
Posts: 16
Kudos: 10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The correct answer is:

(D) The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results.

Reasoning:
The argument relies on the validity and objectivity of studies that claim no-till practices improve soil health. If those studies were funded by parties with a vested interest (e.g., manufacturers promoting high-tech equipment), the results could be biased. This would undermine the credibility of the evidence and weaken the conclusion that no-till farming alone is sufficient for maintaining soil health.

Why the other options are incorrect:

(A): While it presents a counter-opinion about plowing techniques, it does not directly challenge the evidence from the studies supporting no-till farming.
(B): This suggests a combined approach may be beneficial but does not weaken the evidence that no-till alone improves soil health.
(C): This introduces the role of machinery in managing crop residue but does not challenge the studies’ claims that no-till improves soil health.
(E): This option is tricky, but it suggests the metrics favor tilled and treated soils, which could actually support the conclusion that no-till farming performs well despite this bias.

(D) directly targets the credibility of the studies, casting doubt on the objectivity of the evidence, and therefore most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited.
User avatar
A_Nishith
Joined: 29 Aug 2023
Last visit: 12 Nov 2025
Posts: 455
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 455
Kudos: 199
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
To identify the option that most seriously weakens the evidence supporting the conclusion, let's carefully analyze the argument and each choice.

The Argument:
Claim: No-till farming is sufficient to maintain soil health on large farms.
Evidence: Studies show that farms using no-till practices consistently report better soil health.
To weaken the argument, we need to undermine the reliability, relevance, or interpretation of the cited evidence.

Analysis of the Answer Choices:
(A) Many agricultural scientists continue to recommend traditional plowing techniques alongside modern machinery to prevent soil compaction and maintain fertility.
Irrelevant: This discusses traditional plowing recommendations, but it does not directly challenge the studies or the claim that no-till farming is sufficient for maintaining soil health.
Eliminate.

(B) Farms that combine no-till practices with traditional tilling methods report the highest levels of soil fertility and overall health.
Partially relevant but weak: While this suggests that combining methods might be better than using only no-till practices, it does not directly refute the claim that no-till farming alone is sufficient. It introduces an alternative but does not weaken the evidence cited for no-till farming.
Eliminate.

(C) Farms using no-till farming often require high-tech agricultural machinery to effectively manage crop residue, which is not removed by tilling.
Irrelevant: This suggests that no-till farming might depend on high-tech machinery for crop residue management, but it does not undermine the studies’ findings about soil health. The argument is about soil health, not the machinery used.
Eliminate.

(D) The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results.
Highly relevant: This directly challenges the credibility of the studies, suggesting they might be biased because of their funding source. If the studies are biased, the evidence supporting the conclusion about no-till farming is weakened.
Keep.

(E) The metrics used to assess soil health in the studies are typically those that favor soils which have been recently tilled and chemically treated.
Contradicts the premise: The argument states that no-till practices reported better soil health. If the metrics favor tilled soils, this would make the results even more compelling for no-till farming, as it suggests no-till methods are outperforming despite a disadvantage. This strengthens the evidence, not weakens it.
Eliminate.

Correct Answer: (D)
The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results.
User avatar
Nutella024
Joined: 05 Nov 2024
Last visit: 15 Aug 2025
Posts: 30
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 70
WE:Other (Retail: E-commerce)
Posts: 30
Kudos: 24
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
12 Days of Christmas 2024 - 2025 Competition with $40,000 of Prizes

It is commonly believed that the extensive use of high-tech agricultural machinery is essential for maintaining soil health on large farms. However, evidence suggests that simply adopting no-till farming, which minimizes the disturbance of soil, is sufficient. This conclusion is supported by studies indicating that farms using no-till practices consistently report better soil health.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) Many agricultural scientists continue to recommend traditional plowing techniques alongside modern machinery to prevent soil compaction and maintain fertility.

(B) Farms that combine no-till practices with traditional tilling methods report the highest levels of soil fertility and overall health.

(C) Farms using no-till farming often require high-tech agricultural machinery to effectively manage crop residue, which is not removed by tilling.

(D) The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results.

(E) The metrics used to assess soil health in the studies are typically those that favor soils which have been recently tilled and chemically treated.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

To weaken the argument effectively, we need to identify information that undermines the evidence linking no-till farming to better soil health. Let’s evaluate each option:
[hr]
(A) Many agricultural scientists continue to recommend traditional plowing techniques alongside modern machinery to prevent soil compaction and maintain fertility.
This provides a general recommendation but does not directly challenge the evidence that no-till practices improve soil health.
Incorrect.
(B) Farms that combine no-till practices with traditional tilling methods report the highest levels of soil fertility and overall health.
This weakens the conclusion by suggesting that no-till farming alone may not be sufficient to achieve optimal soil health, as combining methods yields better results.
Correct.
(C) Farms using no-till farming often require high-tech agricultural machinery to effectively manage crop residue, which is not removed by tilling.
While this highlights the need for machinery, it does not refute the evidence that no-till farming improves soil health.
Incorrect.
(D) The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results.
This raises questions about the credibility of the studies but does not directly challenge their findings or the link between no-till farming and better soil health.
Incorrect.
(E) The metrics used to assess soil health in the studies are typically those that favor soils which have been recently tilled and chemically treated.
This would challenge the validity of the studies if they favored tilled soils, but it contradicts the argument rather than weakening it directly.
Incorrect.
[hr]
Final Answer:
(B)
User avatar
aviraj1703
Joined: 27 May 2024
Last visit: 10 Mar 2025
Posts: 98
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6
Posts: 98
Kudos: 122
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(A) This actually supports the idea the no-till farming is better. - Incorrect

(B) Again this is a strengthener. - Incorrect

(C) This does not talk about soil health. - Incorrect

(D) Yes, if this is true then definitely no-till is not as good as concluded but it is being made to believe that it is beneficial for soil health. - Correct

(E) This still does not say that no-till is not good for soil health. - Incorrect
User avatar
RamaSubramanian
Joined: 15 May 2022
Last visit: 03 Jul 2025
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
12
 [1]
Given Kudos: 73
Posts: 15
Kudos: 12
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
IMO it is C.
asked to weaken FORCE of EVIDENCE

- Commonly believed high tech machinery is needed to maintain soil health (when reading you can expect some contradictory statement in the next line since commonly believed is mentioned)
- Conclusion : however, no tilling, which minimizes disturbance to soil is sufficient
- Force of evidence : no-till reported better soil health [than soils using hi-tech machines]

A. You can reccomend whatever you want , I dont care, doesnt weaken the force of evidence : REJECT
B. New variable, combination of no-till + traditional tilling - so doesnt weaken : REJECT
C. Makes sense, even though it is no-till, Hi-tech machinery has been used. So, it is the case that Hi-tech machinery is needed : HOLD
D. If it were funded by Hi-tech machniery companies, they would make it to their advantage : REJECT
E: At first glance, this looks lucrative , especially since it is mentioned that no-till minimizes disturbance to soil (and not the case no-till means that soil wouldnt be tilled at all) thereby putting a huge doubt on the effectiveness of study. However, this introduces new variable chemically treated and recently tilled: REJECT

So, I would go for C
User avatar
HarshaBujji
Joined: 29 Jun 2020
Last visit: 16 Nov 2025
Posts: 695
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 247
Location: India
Products:
Posts: 695
Kudos: 885
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
12 Days of Christmas 2024 - 2025 Competition with $40,000 of Prizes

It is commonly believed that the extensive use of high-tech agricultural machinery is essential for maintaining soil health on large farms. However, evidence suggests that simply adopting no-till farming, which minimizes the disturbance of soil, is sufficient. This conclusion is supported by studies indicating that farms using no-till practices consistently report better soil health.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) Many agricultural scientists continue to recommend traditional plowing techniques alongside modern machinery to prevent soil compaction and maintain fertility.

(B) Farms that combine no-till practices with traditional tilling methods report the highest levels of soil fertility and overall health.

(C) Farms using no-till farming often require high-tech agricultural machinery to effectively manage crop residue, which is not removed by tilling.

(D) The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results.

(E) The metrics used to assess soil health in the studies are typically those that favor soils which have been recently tilled and chemically treated.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 


(A): Offers an alternative recommendation but doesn’t challenge the studies. Does not weaken.
(B): Suggests a combination of methods but doesn't invalidate the studies on no-till farming alone. Irrelavant
(C): Highlights the need for machinery, Just no till will not be able to fit here. Hence we cannot claim the evidence This is weakening the evidence Weaken.
(D): Suggests bias due to funding, but doesn’t directly question the study's metrics or validity. Irrelavant.
(E): Points to biased metrics favoring tilled soils, directly undermining the studies' validity and their claim about no-till farming. Weakens.

C vs E, E is best. As this shatters the entire conclusion.

IMO E
User avatar
Rex885
Joined: 06 Apr 2024
Last visit: 27 Dec 2024
Posts: 25
Own Kudos:
26
 [1]
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 25
Kudos: 26
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Correct ans is option C)

counter-conclusion : extensive use of high-tech agricultural machinery is essential.
Conclusion: adopting no-till farming is sufficient. (so high-tech machinery not needed)
Premise : better soil health.

We need to weaken this conclusion. So we need to cast doubt that "no-till farming is NOT sufficient" or 'machinery is needed)

Option C) exactly does that. It says even no-till 'often' requires machinery.

options D and E) are tempting but they are going against the premise. They are saying the study favored machinery view. BUT Given premise clearly states that Study reported better soil for no-till.
User avatar
Heix
Joined: 21 Feb 2024
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 361
Own Kudos:
153
 [2]
Given Kudos: 63
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT Focus 1: 485 Q76 V74 DI77
GPA: 3.4
WE:Accounting (Finance)
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 485 Q76 V74 DI77
Posts: 361
Kudos: 153
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Premises: evidence suggests that simply adopting no-till farming, which minimizes the disturbance of soil, is sufficient for maintaining soil health on large farms

Evidence: studies indicating that farms using no-till practices consistently report better soil health.

Conclusion: extensive use of high-tech agricultural machinery is essential for maintaining soil health on large farms.

let's evaluate each options

A) This doesn't weaken the evidence . It's just a recommendation from scientists, which doesn't directly address the studies citied

B) This actually strengthen the argument by suggesting that no-till practices contribute to better soil health, even if combined with traditional method

C) this weaken the conclusion somewhat by suggesting that no-till practice still requires high tech machinery but it doesn't directly weaken the evidence from the studies

D) This option cast doubt on the credibility of the studies, but it doesn't directly address the results of better health

E) It directly weaken the force of evidence by suggesting that the metrices used in the studies are biased towards recently tilled and chemically treated soils. This implies that the studies' result showing better soil health with no-till practice may be inaccurate or misleading due to the choice of metric used. This option is the correct answer
User avatar
prashantthawrani
Joined: 07 Feb 2023
Last visit: 23 Jun 2025
Posts: 71
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
Products:
Posts: 71
Kudos: 93
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(A): Many agricultural scientists continue to recommend traditional plowing techniques alongside modern machinery to prevent soil compaction and maintain fertility.
  • This does not directly undermine the evidence for no-till farming’s effectiveness.
(B): Farms that combine no-till practices with traditional tilling methods report the highest levels of soil fertility and overall health.
  • its suggesting that. a combination of methods works best.but does not directly undermine the evidence for no-till farming’s effectiveness.
(C): Farms using no-till farming often require high-tech agricultural machinery to effectively manage crop residue, which is not removed by tilling.
  • This shows high-tech machinery is needed in no-till farming, but does not directly undermine the evidence for no-till farming’s effectiveness.
(D): The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results.
  • This raises concerns about the credibility of the studies and suggests potential bias. Serious weakening.
(E): The metrics used to assess soil health in the studies are typically those that favor soils which have been recently tilled and chemically treated.
  • This indicates the studies might not accurately assess soil health under no-till practices, undermining their conclusions. Weakening.
Conclusion:
The strongest weakening is (D).
User avatar
Krunaal
User avatar
Tuck School Moderator
Joined: 15 Feb 2021
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 805
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 251
Status:Under the Square and Compass
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 755 Q90 V90 DI82
GPA: 5.78
WE:Marketing (Consulting)
Products:
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A. Okay, so this is an alternate viewpoint, this does not weaken the evidence cited. INCORRECT

B. This suggests that no-till farming alone may not be sufficient, but does not attack or question the evidence cited. INCORRECT

C. This highlights a dependency on machinery but does not undermine the evidence that no-till practices improve soil health. INCORRECT

D. This does question the credibility of evidence but in that case, the evidence gets stronger as high tech companies wouldn't want no-till farming to be sufficient. INCORRECT

E. This option directly attacks the methodology of the studies. If the metrics are flawed or biased, the entire argument falls apart. CORRECT

Answer E.
User avatar
GraCoder
Joined: 15 Dec 2024
Last visit: 15 Jun 2025
Posts: 65
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 19
Posts: 65
Kudos: 70
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
12 Days of Christmas 2024 - 2025 Competition with $40,000 of Prizes

It is commonly believed that the extensive use of high-tech agricultural machinery is essential for maintaining soil health on large farms. However, evidence suggests that simply adopting no-till farming, which minimizes the disturbance of soil, is sufficient. This conclusion is supported by studies indicating that farms using no-till practices consistently report better soil health.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) Many agricultural scientists continue to recommend traditional plowing techniques alongside modern machinery to prevent soil compaction and maintain fertility.

(B) Farms that combine no-till practices with traditional tilling methods report the highest levels of soil fertility and overall health.

(C) Farms using no-till farming often require high-tech agricultural machinery to effectively manage crop residue, which is not removed by tilling.

(D) The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results.

(E) The metrics used to assess soil health in the studies are typically those that favor soils which have been recently tilled and chemically treated.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

(A) Doesn't weaken it much, lets investigate further options
(B) Doesn't weaken as such, just tells that mixture of various techniques yield fruitful results too.
(C) Weakens it slightly lets investigate further
(D) no-til farming requires less machinery why would manufacturer want to promote that, its a fallacy.
(E) If the evaluation metric itself is wrong, it seriously puts a question on the whole study itself, which was the sole basis of the argument.
User avatar
hr1212
User avatar
GMAT Forum Director
Joined: 18 Apr 2019
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 621
Own Kudos:
924
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,483
GMAT Focus 1: 775 Q90 V85 DI90
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 775 Q90 V85 DI90
Posts: 621
Kudos: 924
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) Many agricultural scientists continue to recommend traditional plowing techniques alongside modern machinery to prevent soil compaction and maintain fertility. This just gives one more recommendation which would be better in general but doesn't give us any counter points for the evidence sited.

(B) Farms that combine no-till practices with traditional tilling methods report the highest levels of soil fertility and overall health. Again an extra information for highest fertility levels but we are just concerned with only no-till practices being sufficient.

(C) Farms using no-till farming often require high-tech agricultural machinery to effectively manage crop residue, which is not removed by tilling. This gives an additional angle where no-till farming would often be accompanied with high-tech machinery which would be leading to better soil fertility rather than just no-till farming giving good results.

(D) The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results. If the studies were funded by high-tech farming equipment manufacturers then they should have biased the test results other way around instead of those being against using their machineries.

(E) The metrics used to assess soil health in the studies are typically those that favor soils which have been recently tilled and chemically treated. This strengthens the argument by saying that the metrics which generally favors tilled soils seems to favor results from no-till practices giving overall better results.
User avatar
ashminipoddar10
Joined: 14 Jun 2024
Last visit: 07 Jul 2025
Posts: 56
Own Kudos:
54
 [1]
Given Kudos: 26
Posts: 56
Kudos: 54
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
It is commonly believed that the extensive use of high-tech agricultural machinery is essential for maintaining soil health on large farms. However, evidence suggests that simply adopting no-till farming, which minimizes the disturbance of soil, is sufficient. This conclusion is supported by studies indicating that farms using no-till practices consistently report better soil health.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) Many agricultural scientists continue to recommend traditional plowing techniques alongside modern machinery to prevent soil compaction and maintain fertility.

(B) Farms that combine no-till practices with traditional tilling methods report the highest levels of soil fertility and overall health.

(C) Farms using no-till farming often require high-tech agricultural machinery to effectively manage crop residue, which is not removed by tilling.

(D) The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results.

(E) The metrics used to assess soil health in the studies are typically those that favor soils which have been recently tilled and chemically treated.
We need to look for something that weakens the evidence where it has been seen that "no-till practices are sufficient to maintain soil health"

A) this support the evidence cited . WRONG

B) if true, this would put the evidence in question as if the better soil health seen in farms using no-till practices also use traditional tilling, then the good soil health cannot be completely attributed to no-till practices. CORRECT

C) the high tech machinery used is not to maintain soil health but to remove crop residue. this also does not link high tech machinery to better soil health in no-till farms. WRONG

D) the funding of the study by manufacturers would be opposite of conflict of interest as the results are opposite to where their interest might lie. WRONG

E) irrelevant. the soils assesed are the ones that are not tilled. and if they favoured tilled soils then the tilled soils would have better health, which is not the case.. WRONG
User avatar
Mantrix
Joined: 13 May 2023
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 159
Own Kudos:
121
 [2]
Given Kudos: 34
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 595 Q87 V75 DI77
GMAT Focus 2: 625 Q81 V82 DI80
GPA: 9
GMAT Focus 2: 625 Q81 V82 DI80
Posts: 159
Kudos: 121
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
P1: High-tech machinery isn't essential for soil health; no-till farming is sufficient
P2: Studies show farms using no-till practices have better soil health
Conclusion: No-till farming alone is enough for soil health

To weaken this argument


Let's analyze each option:

(A) This just states a recommendation but doesn't weaken the evidence about no-till farming's effectiveness
(B) This might slightly weaken the argument, but it doesn't directly challenge the sufficiency of no-till farming
(C) This STRONGLY weakens the argument because it reveals that no-till farming actually requires high-tech machinery to be effective. This directly contradicts the conclusion that no-till farming alone is sufficient without high-tech machinery.
(D) This questions the credibility of the studies but doesn't directly address the relationship between no-till farming and machinery
(E) This challenges the measurement methods but doesn't specifically address the relationship between no-till farming and machinery
User avatar
Ama2424
Joined: 06 Dec 2024
Last visit: 13 Oct 2025
Posts: 9
Given Kudos: 15
Location: Nigeria
Posts: 9
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(C) Farms using no-till farming often require high-tech agricultural machinery to effectively manage crop residue, which is not removed by tilling.

This statement negates the arguement that no till leads to better farm conditions since, at the end of the day high-tech agricultural machinery are used to remove crop residue. The answer is c.
User avatar
Kinshook
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 03 Jun 2019
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,793
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 161
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V34
WE:Engineering (Transportation)
Products:
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V34
Posts: 5,793
Kudos: 5,508
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
It is commonly believed that the extensive use of high-tech agricultural machinery is essential for maintaining soil health on large farms. However, evidence suggests that simply adopting no-till farming, which minimizes the disturbance of soil, is sufficient. This conclusion is supported by studies indicating that farms using no-till practices consistently report better soil health.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) Many agricultural scientists continue to recommend traditional plowing techniques alongside modern machinery to prevent soil compaction and maintain fertility.
The statement does not weaken the force of evidence cited since it does is an unrelated additional information.
Incorrect

(B) Farms that combine no-till practices with traditional tilling methods report the highest levels of soil fertility and overall health.
The argument is not concerned about combining no-till practices with traditional tilling methods.
Incorrect

(C) Farms using no-till farming often require high-tech agricultural machinery to effectively manage crop residue, which is not removed by tilling.
The statement most seriously weakens the force of evidence cited since high-tech agricultural machinery is still required to maintain soil health.
Correct

(D) The studies assessing soil health on farms using no-till practices were funded by manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment, potentially biasing the results.
Manufacturers promoting high-tech farming equipment would NOT like to promote studies indicating that farms using no-till practices consistently report better soil health since they would like to sell their high-tech agricultural machinery.
Incorrect

(E) The metrics used to assess soil health in the studies are typically those that favor soils which have been recently tilled and chemically treated.
This is a one time phenomenon and does not weaken the evidence supported by studies indicating that farms using no-till practices consistently report better soil health
Incorrect


IMO C
 1   2   3   4   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
188 posts