It is currently 23 Oct 2017, 10:59

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 1

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

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Jun 2016, 18:27
sa18 wrote:
What is wrong with D? Doesn't it provide an alternate explanatiion?


I'd like to second this.

Environmentalists: The spill will cause a decline in the population
Critic: This has been proven untrue

One way to weaken the claim that the spill had no effect certainly seems, to me at least, to be if you can provide an alternate explanation for why the environmentalists' claim could still be true despite the immediate evidence. No?

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

2 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Posts: 904

Kudos [?]: 415 [2], given: 69

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.98
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jul 2016, 08:26
2
This post received
KUDOS
goalsnr wrote:
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?

A. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old.
C. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea turtles survive in the ocean until adulthood and return to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach.
D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs.
E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.


Author's Conclusion:- Environmentalist's prediction is unfounded.

Prediction of E's- turtle population will decline.

What we have to prove:- E's prediction is not unfounded. Or E is probably right in the prediction.

Looking at the argument, we see that there are few facts:-
-Oil spill occurred 5 years ago
-BB is the ONLY ground for MT
- Oil spill prevented nearly ALL eggs from hatching


Surprising fact:- MT still return to lay its eggs at the BB (She is not aware of the oil spill, it seems :P. The site is disastrous for the eggs)

But wait! Where are these turtles coming from? Nearly ALL eggs vanished 5 years ago and continue to prevent hatching eggs further.

The only reason could be that these females coming to lay their eggs here were born before oil spill. They will lay the eggs, which in turn will be vanished by oil, leading to decreased turtle population and supporting E's prediction.

Few Possible strengtheners-
1) The Turtles, along with eggs, coming to lay its eggs will severely be affected by the oil in the water.
2) The conditions at the base of sea has not improved since past 5 years and nearly ALL eggs will continue to vanish.


A. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach. This is just a piece of information , but it doesn't tell us what will be the effect on number of turtles in future. Also, it is mentioned in the argument that there were eggs (only then they can vanish). It seems a false information.

B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old. This is what one possible answer. These turtles will eventually die at certain old age and the eggs will anyway be vanished.

C. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea turtles survive in the ocean until adulthood and return to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach. We are talking about abnormal conditions in the argument.

D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs. It makes us believe that if predator has declined , MT should increase. But it doesn't tell us the other way.

E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill. This is out of scope. Rejection doesn't mean that population will decline while their is increase in number of females going to the beach to lay eggs.
_________________

I welcome critical analysis of my post!! That will help me reach 700+

Kudos [?]: 415 [2], given: 69

BSchool Forum Moderator
User avatar
S
Joined: 28 Nov 2014
Posts: 917

Kudos [?]: 209 [0], given: 79

Concentration: Strategy
Schools: Fisher '19 (M)
GPA: 3.71
Reviews Badge
Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Oct 2016, 06:23
DensetsuNo Can you share your opinion on the correct answer to this question.

Kudos [?]: 209 [0], given: 79

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 05 Dec 2016
Posts: 172

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 46

Concentration: Strategy, Finance
GMAT 1: 620 Q46 V29
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jun 2017, 00:32
A. Contradicts the premises. - Eliminate
B. Correct.
C. Out of scope. - Eliminate
D. Alternate cause, no tie to the conclusion. - Eliminate
E. Out of scope. - Eliminate

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 46

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 04 Feb 2014
Posts: 204

Kudos [?]: 115 [0], given: 157

Concentration: Finance, International Business
GPA: 3
WE: Project Management (Manufacturing)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Oct 2017, 08:56
I can't still understand why D is wrong!
_________________

Kudos if you like my post

Kudos [?]: 115 [0], given: 157

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Mar 2014
Posts: 106

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 19

Schools: ISB '19, IIMA , IIMB
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V30
Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Oct 2017, 10:18
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?

A. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old.
Correct ; Since sea turtles come when they are 10 year old , the ill effects of chemical spill will be visible after 10 years.
C. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea turtles survive in the ocean until adulthood and return to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach.
D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs.
Highlighted part is the issue here. decline of 'one of the several species' will not have significant overall effect. ; incorrect

E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 19

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 04 Feb 2014
Posts: 204

Kudos [?]: 115 [0], given: 157

Concentration: Finance, International Business
GPA: 3
WE: Project Management (Manufacturing)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Oct 2017, 20:50
rishabhdxt wrote:
D. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs.
Highlighted part is the issue here. decline of 'one of the several species' will not have significant overall effect. ; incorrect




rishabhdxt Thanks for the reply.

How can we say that it won't have a significant effect? Maybe this specie is the largest of the group and other specie population is almost negligible in comparison to this specie! We don't have enough data to prove any of this. Am I assuming too much? If there was no option B, would u have chosen this option?
_________________

Kudos if you like my post

Kudos [?]: 115 [0], given: 157

Re: A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s   [#permalink] 03 Oct 2017, 20:50

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 27 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker s

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


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

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.