GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 27 Jan 2020, 09:28

### 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

# During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 238
Location: united states
During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 10 Sep 2017, 08:40
3
00:00

Difficulty:

15% (low)

Question Stats:

82% (01:33) correct 18% (01:41) wrong based on 384 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who lived near affected areas were advised to douse their roofs with water to prevent their houses from catching fire, before evacuating the area. After the fires were brought under control and the homeowners were allowed to return to the area, many who doused their roofs discovered significant fire damage to their houses. Clearly, then, dousing their roofs was a wasted effort.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the conclusion above?

(A) The houses of owners who did not douse the roofs with water suffered appreciably more fire damage than did those of owners who did douse the roofs with water.

(B) Not all homeowners who doused their roofs did so to the same extent.

(C) The fire insurance rates for those who doused their roofs did not increase after the fire.

(D) The houses that suffered the least damage were those in which the owners remained and continuously doused the roofs.

(E) Most of the homeowners who doused their roofs had been through a brushfire evacuation before.

Originally posted by shoonya on 03 Aug 2006, 12:50.
Last edited by hazelnut on 10 Sep 2017, 08:40, edited 2 times in total.
Edited the question.
Director
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 508
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2006, 14:15
1
Clearly A

C: Dousing was a wasted effort.

If A is true then dousing was beneficial. Therefore it was not a wasted effort.
Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 238
Location: united states
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2006, 17:42
1
and how abt D?

D -
"The houses that suffered the least damage were those in which the owners remained and continuously doused the roofs"

would this not be a better answer?
Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Nov 2016
Posts: 325
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2019, 07:16
1
shoonya wrote:
and how abt D?

D -
"The houses that suffered the least damage were those in which the owners remained and continuously doused the roofs"

would this not be a better answer?

I am sure you are not reading this Post anymore, however I also tended to pick option D but there is a problem with D. The problem is in D it is claiming that few people remained in the house and doused but the Paragraph says that everyone evacuated and returned to their home once the fire was in control.

Hope this helps.
Intern
Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 43
Location: Boston
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2006, 12:55
A

The argument is that "even though the houses were doused with water, the damage was extensive. Hence it was not useful to douse the house with water".

To weaken the argument, we have to find something that would suggest that dousing helped.

Answer choice A, says that "people who doused their house with water had significantly less damage than others who didn't"

So the answer choice is A
SVP
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 1999
Schools: Completed at SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - Class of 2008
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2006, 14:41
A

Conclusion: Dousing roofs was a wasted effort.

Premise: People who doused their roofs discovered significant fire damage to their houses.

How can be provide an evidence that undermines the premise and hence conclusion.

A is doing that. Eventhough houses that were doused had fire damage but houses that were not doused were even more damaged. It means dousing was not a waste of effort.
_________________
SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - MBA CLASS OF 2008
SVP
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 2217
Schools: Darden
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2006, 14:43
I think this one is fairly straightforwad. A is the only choice that makes sense.
SVP
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 1999
Schools: Completed at SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - Class of 2008
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2006, 20:03
shoonya wrote:
and how abt D?

D -
"The houses that suffered the least damage were those in which the owners remained and continuously doused the roofs"

would this not be a better answer?

Seems out of scope.

See the bold part:
During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who lived near affected areas were advised to douse their roofs with water to prevent their houses from catching fire, before evacuating the area. After the fires were brought under control and the homeowners were allowed to return to the area, many who doused their roofs discovered significant fire damage to their houses. Clearly, then, dousing their roofs was a wasted effort.

So we are not that much concerned about people who remained in their houses.
_________________
SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - MBA CLASS OF 2008
VP
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 1104
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2006, 22:22
Clear winner A.

Conclusion: dousing the roofs was an wasted effort.

Weaken: Those who didnot didnot douse their roofs suffered more losses than those who did.
CEO
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 3527
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2006, 04:08
Yes, (A). Those who doused their rooves were spared the heaviest damage. D doesn`t goes out of scope because those homeowners never even evacuated in the forst place.
Manager
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 57
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Sep 2013, 03:37
The correct answer is A. The conclusion of the argument is that dousing the roofs
with water was a wasted effort. The basis for this claim is that the houses of
those who doused their roofs still suffered fire damage. We are asked to weaken
this conclusion.
Choice A states that the houses of owners who did not douse the roofs with
water suffered appreciably more fire damage than did those of owners who did
douse the roofs with water. This weakens the conclusion because it suggests
that dousing the roofs was not a wasted effort. Correct.
Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2014
Posts: 136
GMAT 1: 610 Q49 V25
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V40
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jul 2015, 23:01
Please explain why can it not be C?

If the insurance rates did not go up for those who put in efforts to douse the fire, then it would be a great relief to those guys.

A, on the other hand only gives a relative comparison. When in fact, dousing the fire looks to be a wasted effort because their houses did get damaged by fire, even though it was less as compared to those who did not douse the fire.

So, comparatively speaking, between A & C, A is more directly showing the good stuff about dousing the fire.
Verbal Forum Moderator
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2447
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Feb 2017, 04:49
shoonya wrote:
During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who lived near affected areas were advised to douse their roofs with water to prevent their houses from catching fire, before evacuating the area. After the fires were brought under control and the homeowners were allowed to return to the area, many who doused their roofs discovered significant fire damage to their houses. Clearly, then, dousing their roofs was a wasted effort.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the conclusion above?

A)The houses of owners who did not douse the roofs with water suffered appreciably more fire damage than did those of owners who did douse the roofs with water.

B)Not all homeowners who doused their roofs did so to the same extent.

C)The fire insurance rates for those who doused their roofs did not increase after the fire.

D)The houses that suffered the least damage were those in which the owners remained and continuously doused the roofs.

E)Most of the homeowners who doused their roofs had been through a brushfire evacuation before.

Choice A states that the houses of owners who did not douse the roofs with water suffered appreciably more fire damage than did those of owners who did douse the roofs with water. This weakens the conclusion because it suggests that dousing the roofs was not a wasted effort.

_________________
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
Director
Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 675
Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Feb 2017, 10:26
A)The houses of owners who did not douse the roofs with water suffered appreciably more fire damage than did those of owners who did douse the roofs with water.
This choice clearly weaknes the argument since it provides facts that the damage to the doused houses was lesser than the damage on the house which were not doused.

B)Not all homeowners who doused their roofs did so to the same extent.
the extent of the dousing is not being discussed in the arguement.

C)The fire insurance rates for those who doused their roofs did not increase after the fire.
Fire insurance is out of scope

D)The houses that suffered the least damage were those in which the owners remained and continuously doused the roofs.
the argument discuss about the houses where the owners were asked to leave and returned after the fire was controlled and found and assesed the damages to their houses respectively.

E)Most of the homeowners who doused their roofs had been through a brushfire evacuation before.
The point is out of scope as it des not provide information about the damages suffered from the fire.
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1343
Location: Malaysia
Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2017, 08:45
shoonya wrote:
During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who lived near affected areas were advised to douse their roofs with water to prevent their houses from catching fire, before evacuating the area. After the fires were brought under control and the homeowners were allowed to return to the area, many who doused their roofs discovered significant fire damage to their houses. Clearly, then, dousing their roofs was a wasted effort.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the conclusion above?

(A) The houses of owners who did not douse the roofs with water suffered appreciably more fire damage than did those of owners who did douse the roofs with water.

(B) Not all homeowners who doused their roofs did so to the same extent.

(C) The fire insurance rates for those who doused their roofs did not increase after the fire.

(D) The houses that suffered the least damage were those in which the owners remained and continuously doused the roofs.

(E) Most of the homeowners who doused their roofs had been through a brushfire evacuation before.

The conclusion of the argument is that dousing the roofs with water was a wasted effort. The basis for this claim is that the houses of those who doused their roofs still suffered fire damage. We are asked to weaken this conclusion; we could do so by showing that dousing the roofs did provide some positive effect.

(A) CORRECT. This choice provides a positive effect enjoyed by those who doused their roofs with water: if they hadn't, the homes would have suffered even more damage.

(B) This may be true, but it does not show that those who doused their roofs did enjoy some positive result.

(C) This is irrelevant to the argument; it does not address the extent of the damage and it occurs after the incident described in the argument.

(D) While this may be true, it does not address those who doused their roofs and then left, the specific effort discussed in the passage. We still have not shown that those who doused and left did not waste their time.

(E) This is irrelevant to the argument; it does not address the extent of the damage.
_________________
"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."

“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”

"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."

Re: During the recent spate of brushfires in the Southwest, homeowners who   [#permalink] 10 Sep 2017, 08:45
Display posts from previous: Sort by