It is currently 25 Jun 2017, 09:27

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# A report on acid rain concluded, Most forests in Canada are

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

CEO
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2559
A report on acid rain concluded, Most forests in Canada are [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2008, 14:00
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

94% (01:51) correct 6% (00:00) wrong based on 56 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A report on acid rain concluded, “Most forests in Canada are not being damaged by acid rain.” Critics of the report insist the conclusion be changed to, “Most forests in Canada do not show visible symptoms of damage by acid rain, such as abnormal loss of leaves, slower rates of growth, or higher mortality.”
Which of the following, if true, provides the best logical justification for the critics’ insistence that the report’s conclusion be changed?
(A) Some forests in Canada are being damaged by acid rain.
(B) Acid rain could be causing damage for which symptoms have not yet become visible.
(C) The report does not compare acid rain damage to Canadian forests with acid rain damage to forests in other countries.
(D) All forests in Canada have received acid rain during the past fifteen years.
(E) The severity of damage by acid rain differs from forest to forest.
Manager
Joined: 18 May 2007
Posts: 55
Re: Paper CR Test 28 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2008, 14:08
1
KUDOS
is the OA D?
(A) Some forests in Canada are being damaged by acid rain.
even if true..it does not make the statement "most forest" incorrect..so there is no justification
(B) Acid rain could be causing damage for which symptoms have not yet become visible.
not a strong justification
(C) The report does not compare acid rain damage to Canadian forests with acid rain damage to forests in other countries.
not a strong justification
(D) All forests in Canada have received acid rain during the past fifteen years.
a good justification..this proves that the damage may have not begun as yet..but acid rain has been following consistently
(E) The severity of damage by acid rain differs from forest to forest.
not a strong justification
SVP
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 1558
Re: Paper CR Test 28 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2008, 14:11
1
KUDOS
i think it is B.

D just says that all forests received .... that means, at one point or another, they received acid rain. Not strong enough to justify why they want the conclusion changed.
Director
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 753
Location: Oxford
Schools: Oxford'10
Re: Paper CR Test 28 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2008, 15:13
1
KUDOS
we are trying to prove that acid rain causes damage to ALL Canadian forests, Period! Which one of these will provide us with the proof

GMATBLACKBELT wrote:
A report on acid rain concluded, “Most forests in Canada are not being damaged by acid rain.” Critics of the report insist the conclusion be changed to, “Most forests in Canada do not show visible symptoms of damage by acid rain, such as abnormal loss of leaves, slower rates of growth, or higher mortality.”
Which of the following, if true, provides the best logical justification for the critics’ insistence that the report’s conclusion be changed?
(A) Some forests in Canada are being damaged by acid rain. doesn't confirm that acid rain causes some damage to all
(B) Acid rain could be causing damage for which symptoms have not yet become visible. speculation is not proof
(C) The report does not compare acid rain damage to Canadian forests with acid rain damage to forests in other countries. irrelevant, lets stick to Canadian forects
(D) All forests in Canada have received acid rain during the past fifteen years. so? where is the evidence about damage?
(E) The severity of damage by acid rain differs from forest to forest. BINGO!, this is saying that the severity of DAMAGE differs from forest to forest, thereby acknowleging the fact that damage does occur at the very least
Director
Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 622
Re: Paper CR Test 28 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2008, 15:32
1
KUDOS
It's B.
CEO
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2559
Re: Paper CR Test 28 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Feb 2008, 16:26
OA is B
Director
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 786
Re: Paper CR Test 28 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Feb 2008, 20:51
This is a good one. My analysis led me to A.
Can anyone help in my analysis?

Thanks

The revised conclusion: “Most forests in Canada do not show visible symptoms of damage by acid rain …” implies some forests could have damaged or not by acid rains.

(A) Some forests in Canada are being damaged by acid rain.[Hold it]

(B) Acid rain could be causing damage for which symptoms have not yet become visible.[This contradicts revised conclusion – eliminate it]

(C) The report does not compare acid rain damage to Canadian forests with acid rain damage to forests in other countries.[There is no reference in the argument about forests in other countries – eliminate it]

(D) All forests in Canada have received acid rain during the past fifteen years. [It is immaterial to argument whether forests in Canada received last fifteen years or not – eliminate it]

(E) The severity of damage by acid rain differs from forest to forest.[That may be true but has no reference to the forests in Canada – eliminate it]
VP
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 1438
Schools: Chicago Booth '11
Re: Paper CR Test 28 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Feb 2008, 08:10
1
KUDOS
I thought B was pretty straightforward.

A I believe is wrong because it agrees with the first report. When you are supposed to justify the critics criticism.

The first report says that "Most forests in Canada are not being damaged by acid rain"

That implies that (A) Some forests in Canada are being damaged by acid rain.

This gives no thought to the critics argument. The critic states that most forests do not show "visible signs" of damage implying that are are invisible signs of damage which could cause damage.
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Mar 2012
Posts: 367
Schools: Schulich '16
Re: A report on acid rain concluded, Most forests in Canada are [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jun 2013, 05:17
its clearly B.

For rest other choices a,c,d,e both parties mentioned in the argument can agree on..
Intern
Joined: 29 May 2013
Posts: 12
Re: A report on acid rain concluded, Most forests in Canada are [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jun 2013, 18:33
(A) Some forests in Canada are being damaged by acid rain.

it implies that "fewer than half forests are not being damaged by acid rain...". -- in this way ve can eliminate this option.

left out with B
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10155
Re: A report on acid rain concluded, Most forests in Canada are [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jun 2016, 11:27
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.
Director
Status: I don't stop when I'm Tired,I stop when I'm done
Joined: 11 May 2014
Posts: 548
GPA: 2.81
A report on acid rain concluded, Most forests in Canada are [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jun 2016, 13:23
GMATBLACKBELT wrote:
A report on acid rain concluded, “Most forests in Canada are not being damaged by acid rain.” Critics of the report insist the conclusion be changed to, “Most forests in Canada do not show visible symptoms of damage by acid rain, such as abnormal loss of leaves, slower rates of growth, or higher mortality.”
Which of the following, if true, provides the best logical justification for the critics’ insistence that the report’s conclusion be changed?
(A) Some forests in Canada are being damaged by acid rain.
(B) Acid rain could be causing damage for which symptoms have not yet become visible.
(C) The report does not compare acid rain damage to Canadian forests with acid rain damage to forests in other countries.
(D) All forests in Canada have received acid rain during the past fifteen years.
(E) The severity of damage by acid rain differs from forest to forest.

jasimuddin IMO,
OA is B Because the presence or absence of the visible symptoms created two different situation that justify the conclution

Am I right?What is your approach?
_________________

Md. Abdur Rakib

Please Press +1 Kudos,If it helps
Sentence Correction-Collection of Ron Purewal's "elliptical construction/analogies" for SC Challenges

A report on acid rain concluded, Most forests in Canada are   [#permalink] 28 Jun 2016, 13:23
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 A report of a government survey concluded that Center City was among 4 06 May 2017, 10:06
9 Acid rain, caused by high levels of sulfur dioxide and mercu 8 02 Apr 2016, 13:12
Most forests in Canada are not being damaged by acid rain 2 04 Jan 2012, 22:57
5 Data from satellite photographs of the tropical rain forest 14 21 Feb 2016, 12:06
6 A report on acid rain concluded, “Most forests in Canada are 9 26 Jul 2015, 04:17
Display posts from previous: Sort by