Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
22 Jan 2020, 04:33
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
71% (02:04) correct
29%
(02:24)
wrong
based on 639
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
A study was designed to establish what effect, if any, the long-term operation of offshore oil rigs had on animal life on the bottom of the sea. The study compared the sea-bottom communities near rigs with those located in control sites several miles from any rig and found no significant differences. The researchers concluded that oil rigs had no adverse effect on sea-bottom animals.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the researcher’ conclusion?
(A) Commercially important fish depend on sea-bottom animals for much of their food, so a drop in catches of these fish would be evidence of damage to sea-bottom communities.
(B) The discharge of oil from offshore oil rigs typically occurs at the surface of the water, and currents often carry the oil considerable distances before it settles on the ocean floor.
(C) Contamination of the ocean floor from sewage and industrial effluent does not result in the destruction of all sea-bottom animals but instead reduces species diversity as well as density of animal life.
(D) Only part of any oil discharged into the ocean reaches the ocean floor: some oil evaporates, and some remains in the water as suspended drops.
(E) Where the ocean floor consists of soft sediment, contaminating oil persists much longer than where the ocean floor is rocky.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the researcher’ conclusion?
(A) Commercially important fish depend on sea-bottom animals for much of their food, so a drop in catches of these fish would be evidence of damage to sea-bottom communities.
(B) The discharge of oil from offshore oil rigs typically occurs at the surface of the water, and currents often carry the oil considerable distances before it settles on the ocean floor.
(C) Contamination of the ocean floor from sewage and industrial effluent does not result in the destruction of all sea-bottom animals but instead reduces species diversity as well as density of animal life.
(D) Only part of any oil discharged into the ocean reaches the ocean floor: some oil evaporates, and some remains in the water as suspended drops.
(E) Where the ocean floor consists of soft sediment, contaminating oil persists much longer than where the ocean floor is rocky.
01 Feb 2020, 18:01
Kudos
Bookmarks
IMO B.
The stem says that "The study compared the sea-bottom communities near rigs with those located in control sites several miles from any rig and found no significant differences." The author assumes that the rigs can not affect the species at control sites which are several miles from the rig and hence the two samples of species would be different.
However as per option B if the currents carry the oil to considerable distances then maybe author ended up observing the similar sample from both near the rig and several miles away from the rig and hence didn't find any difference.
Hope it makes sense.
The stem says that "The study compared the sea-bottom communities near rigs with those located in control sites several miles from any rig and found no significant differences." The author assumes that the rigs can not affect the species at control sites which are several miles from the rig and hence the two samples of species would be different.
However as per option B if the currents carry the oil to considerable distances then maybe author ended up observing the similar sample from both near the rig and several miles away from the rig and hence didn't find any difference.
Hope it makes sense.
