It is currently 10 Dec 2017, 19:27

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

Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game

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

Hide Tags

VP
VP
User avatar
G
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1088

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 562

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: 314 Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
CAT Tests
Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2017, 07:19
Premise 1 The commissioner of the Fish and Game Authority would have the public believe that increases in the number of marine fish caught demonstrate that this resource is no longer endangered.
Premise 2 This is a specious argument, as unsound as it would be to assert that the ever-increasing rate at which rain forests are being cut down demonstrates a lack of danger to that resource
Premise 3 The real cause of the increased fish-catch is a greater efficiency in using technologies that deplete resources.
Now for we know from 1 that the claims of the commissioner are specious and canard .
From 2 we have an analogy to show the fallacy of the argument put forth by commissioner .
From 3 We know the real reason behind the increase in cached fish .
Only E follows from the argument.

_________________

We are more often frightened than hurt; and we suffer more from imagination than from reality

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 562

VP
VP
avatar
S
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1322

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 1331

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jun 2017, 00:13
see? there is a big difference between a conclusion and an inference question. The latter requires what must be true as a result of deduction from the passage. (can be a detail)

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 1331

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 12 Mar 2017
Posts: 53

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 22

Re: Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jul 2017, 09:35
Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game Authority would have the public believe that increases in the number of marine fish caught demonstrate that this resource is no longer endangered. This is a specious argument, as unsound as it would be to assert that the ever-increasing rate at which rain forests are being cut down demonstrates a lack of danger to that resource. The real cause of the increased fish-catch is a greater efficiency in using technologies that deplete resources.

The environmentalist's statements, if true, best support which of the following as a conclusion?

(A) The use of technology is the reason for the increasing encroachment of people on nature.
" On nature ". We do not know that yet. We have been only told about fishes in particular which is one part of nature.

(8) It is possible to determine how many fish are in the sea in some way other than by catching fish.
We are not concerned about how to count no. of fishes here.

(C) The proportion of marine fish that are caught is as high as the proportion of rain forest trees that are cut down each year.
[color=#ffff00]No real numbers have been given for the proportions to be compared.[/color]

(D) Modern technologies waste resources by catching inedible fish.
We can't really comment on that.

(E) Marine fish continue to be an endangered resource.
After all the POE, this statement is safe.

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 22

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 10 Apr 2015
Posts: 205

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 35

GPA: 3.31
Re: Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Aug 2017, 20:51
Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game Authority would have the public believe that increases in the number of marine fish caught demonstrate that this resource is no longer endangered. This is a specious argument, as unsound as it would be to assert that the ever-increasing rate at which rain forests are being cut down demonstrates a lack of danger to that resource. The real cause of the increased fish-catch is a greater efficiency in using technologies that deplete resources.

The environmentalist's statements, if true, best support which of the following as a conclusion?

(A) The use of technology is the reason for the increasing encroachment of people on nature.
(8) It is possible to determine how many fish are in the sea in some way other than by catching fish.
(C) The proportion of marine fish that are caught is as high as the proportion of rain forest trees that are cut down each year.
(D) Modern technologies waste resources by catching inedible fish.
(E) Marine fish continue to be an endangered resource.

According to the environmentalist, "increases in the number of marine fish caught" is because of "greater efficiency in using technologies that deplete resources", NOT "Marine fish is available in plenty"


Environmentalist conclude - "The real cause of the increased fish-catch is a greater efficiency in using technologies that deplete resources."

So, " Marine fish continue to be an endangered resource."

Clear E.
_________________

In case you find my posts helpful, give me Kudos. Thank you.

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 35

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 28 Jun 2015
Posts: 87

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 117

Location: Australia
Re: Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Sep 2017, 20:32
Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game Authority would have the public believe that increases in the number of marine fish caught demonstrate that this resource is no longer endangered. This is a specious argument, as unsound as it would be to assert that the ever-increasing rate at which rain forests are being cut down demonstrates a lack of danger to that resource. The real cause of the increased fish-catch is a greater efficiency in using technologies that deplete resources.

The environmentalist's statements, if true, best support which of the following as a conclusion?

(A) The use of technology is the reason for the increasing encroachment of people on nature. - Incorrect - Exaggerated Ans
(8) It is possible to determine how many fish are in the sea in some way other than by catching fish. - Incorrect - New info
(C) The proportion of marine fish that are caught is as high as the proportion of rain forest trees that are cut down each year. - Incorrect - Exaggerated Ans
(D) Modern technologies waste resources by catching inedible fish. Incorrect - New info
(E) Marine fish continue to be an endangered resource. - Correct - Combination Info: "resource is no longer endangered" + "This is a specious argument"

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 117

VP
VP
avatar
S
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1322

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 1331

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Nov 2017, 16:49
stuck with A and E.
Details in the passage will distract test takers from the main points, so besides critical thinking, ignoring unimportant details is an useful skill.

"increases in the number of marine fish caught demonstrate that this resource is no longer endangered. This is a specious argument, as unsound " -> eliminate A.

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 1331

Re: Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game   [#permalink] 22 Nov 2017, 16:49

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 26 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game

  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®.