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.
Jun 0210:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Probability is one of the most important GMAT Quant topics because it often combines logic, counting, set theory, and permutations & combinations. Many students try to solve probability questions by listing every possible case, but GMAT probability...
May 2110:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products.
May 2910:00 AM IST
-11:00 PM IST
Start your journey with a fully customized action plan and work with a dedicated mentor to achieve a 735+ score.- Jun 10
06:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
01 Jun 2026, 01:16
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
64% (01:14) correct
36%
(02:45)
wrong
based on 14
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Early in the twentieth century, Lake Konfa became very polluted. Recently fish populations have recovered as release of industrial pollutants has declined and the lake’s waters have become cleaner. Fears are now being voiced that the planned construction of an oil pipeline across the lake’s bottom might revive pollution and cause the fish population to decline again. However, a technology for preventing leaks is being installed. Therefore, provided this technology is effective, those fears are groundless.
The argument depends on assuming which of the following?
A. Apart from development related to the pipeline, there will be no new industrial development around the lake that will create renewed pollution in its waters.
B. Other than the possibility of a leak, there is no realistic pollution threat posed to the lake by the pipeline’s construction.
C. There is no reason to believe that the leak-preventing technology would be ineffective when installed in the pipeline in Lake Konfa.
D. Damage to the lake’s fish populations would be the only harm that a leak of oil from the pipeline would cause.
E. The species of fish that are present in Lake Konfa now are the same as those that were in the lake before it was affected by pollution.
The argument depends on assuming which of the following?
A. Apart from development related to the pipeline, there will be no new industrial development around the lake that will create renewed pollution in its waters.
B. Other than the possibility of a leak, there is no realistic pollution threat posed to the lake by the pipeline’s construction.
C. There is no reason to believe that the leak-preventing technology would be ineffective when installed in the pipeline in Lake Konfa.
D. Damage to the lake’s fish populations would be the only harm that a leak of oil from the pipeline would cause.
E. The species of fish that are present in Lake Konfa now are the same as those that were in the lake before it was affected by pollution.
Every tricky question should trigger a follow up quiz.
Build that habit with
GMAT Club Forum Quiz →.
01 Jun 2026, 11:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
Early in the twentieth century, Lake Konfa became very polluted. Recently fish populations have recovered as release of industrial pollutants has declined and the lake’s waters have become cleaner. Fears are now being voiced that the planned construction of an oil pipeline across the lake’s bottom might revive pollution and cause the fish population to decline again. However, a technology for preventing leaks is being installed.
Therefore, provided this technology is effective, those fears are groundless. The argument depends on assuming which of the following?
The argument says the fears are groundless if the leak-preventing technology works. The missing assumption is that the pipeline cannot realistically pollute the lake in some other way, apart from leaks.
A. Apart from development related to the pipeline, there will be no new industrial development around the lake that will create renewed pollution in its waters.
This is too broad. The argument is about fears related to the pipeline, not every possible future source of pollution around the lake.
B. Other than the possibility of a leak, there is no realistic pollution threat posed to the lake by the pipeline’s construction.
This is correct. If the pipeline could pollute the lake in some way other than leaking, then leak-prevention technology would not make the fears groundless. The argument depends on ruling out other realistic pollution threats from the pipeline.
C. There is no reason to believe that the leak-preventing technology would be ineffective when installed in the pipeline in Lake Konfa.
This is not required because the conclusion is already conditional: provided this technology is effective.
D. Damage to the lake’s fish populations would be the only harm that a leak of oil from the pipeline would cause.
This is irrelevant. The argument is about whether pollution could return and fish populations could decline, not about whether oil leaks could cause other harms.
E. The species of fish that are present in Lake Konfa now are the same as those that were in the lake before it was affected by pollution.
This is not required. The argument concerns whether the current fish population may decline again, not whether the species are identical to the earlier ones.
Answer: (B)
Therefore, provided this technology is effective, those fears are groundless. The argument depends on assuming which of the following?
The argument says the fears are groundless if the leak-preventing technology works. The missing assumption is that the pipeline cannot realistically pollute the lake in some other way, apart from leaks.
A. Apart from development related to the pipeline, there will be no new industrial development around the lake that will create renewed pollution in its waters.
This is too broad. The argument is about fears related to the pipeline, not every possible future source of pollution around the lake.
B. Other than the possibility of a leak, there is no realistic pollution threat posed to the lake by the pipeline’s construction.
This is correct. If the pipeline could pollute the lake in some way other than leaking, then leak-prevention technology would not make the fears groundless. The argument depends on ruling out other realistic pollution threats from the pipeline.
C. There is no reason to believe that the leak-preventing technology would be ineffective when installed in the pipeline in Lake Konfa.
This is not required because the conclusion is already conditional: provided this technology is effective.
D. Damage to the lake’s fish populations would be the only harm that a leak of oil from the pipeline would cause.
This is irrelevant. The argument is about whether pollution could return and fish populations could decline, not about whether oil leaks could cause other harms.
E. The species of fish that are present in Lake Konfa now are the same as those that were in the lake before it was affected by pollution.
This is not required. The argument concerns whether the current fish population may decline again, not whether the species are identical to the earlier ones.
Answer: (B)
Moderators:
619 posts
