Extinction is the way of nature. Scientists estimate that over half of

Question

Extinction is the way of nature. Scientists estimate that over half of the species that have ever come into existence on this planet were already extinct before humans developed even the most primitive of tools. This constant natural process of species emergence and extinction, however, is ignored by those who wish to trace the blame for more recent extinctions to humanity’s use of technology, with its consequent effects on the environment. These people must be made to understand that the species that have become extinct in modern times would have become extinct by now even if humans had never acquired technology.

Which one of the following identifies a reasoning error in the passage?

(A) The author mistakenly assumes that technology as not caused any harm to the environment.

(B) The author ignores the fact that some species that are not yet extinct are in danger of extinction.

(C) The author fails to consider that there are probably species in existence that have not yet been identified and studied by scientists.

(D) The author cites scientists who support the theory that over half of all species that ever existed have become extinct, but fails to mention any scientists who do not support that theory.

(E) The author provides no specific evidence that the species that have become extinct in modern times are the same species that would have become extinct in the absence of human technology.

IanStewart · Answer

The argument uses a lot of words to say, essentially, "extinctions used to be common. Therefore the extinctions we see now have nothing to do with human technology". That should obviously be an absurd argument, because it provides no evidence for its conclusion. Answer E points out that problem with the argument.

anumnit90 · Answer

Though I was able to mark the right answer (E), but just want to understand 'what is wrong with option A'.
Please help regarding the same.

TIA

nandeta · Answer

Extinction is the way of nature. Scientists estimate that over half of the species that have ever come into existence on this planet were already extinct before humans developed even the most primitive of tools. This constant natural process of species emergence and extinction, however, is ignored by those who wish to trace the blame for more recent extinctions to humanity’s use of technology, with its consequent effects on the environment. These people must be made to understand that the species that have become extinct in modern times would have become extinct by now even if humans had never acquired technology.

Which one of the following identifies a reasoning error in the passage?

(A) The author mistakenly assumes that technology as not caused any harm to the environment. 
Wrong. The author doesn't assume this. Scientist assume that extinctions are caused by the use of technology. The author's counters it by saying that they would have become more instinct if humans had never acquired technology.

(B) The author ignores the fact that some species that are not yet extinct are in danger of extinction. 
Wrong. Author states that extinction is the way of nature. that species that are not yet extinct will become extinct one day. It's just the matter of time.

(C) The author fails to consider that there are probably species in existence that have not yet been identified and studied by scientists. 
Wrong. Any species will follow this natural cycle. This cycle won't be broken down on the base of species.

(D) The author cites scientists who support the theory that over half of all species that ever existed have become extinct, but fails to mention any scientists who do not support that theory. 
Wrong. We have to mention the logical error in the theory and not missing logical statement.

(E) The author provides no specific evidence that the species that have become extinct in modern times are the same species that would have become extinct in the absence of human technology. 
Right. This author is just assuming everything without any direct linkage or presenting any evidence related to its argument.

AbhishekDhanraJ72 · Answer

why e is answer in option it clearly says no evidence for same species . why do we even want evidence for same species rather we wan evidence for extinctions for species in the absence of human technology???? poor question.....

chaitralirr · Answer

Extinction is the way of nature. Scientists estimate that over half of the species that have ever come into existence on this planet were already extinct before humans developed even the most primitive of tools. This constant natural process of species emergence and extinction, however, is ignored by those who wish to trace the blame for more recent extinctions to humanity’s use of technology, with its consequent effects on the environment. These people must be made to understand that the species that have become extinct in modern times would have become extinct by now even if humans had never acquired technology.

Stimulus: extinction is the way of future. Scientists estimate that over half of the species that existed in the world were already extinct before humans developed most prominent tool. This constant process of extinction and emergence should be taken into consideration before blaming technology with its consequent effects on the environment. These species would have become extinct in modern times by now even if humans had never acquired technology.

Which one of the following identifies a reasoning error in the passage?

(A) The author mistakenly assumes that technology as not caused any harm to the environment.  The author states that even without technology these species would have been extinct but does not exclude or deny the fact that technology has not caused any effect. hence incorrect

(B) The author ignores the fact that some species that are not yet extinct are in danger of extinction.  irrelevant

(C) The author fails to consider that there are probably species in existence that have not yet been identified and studied by scientists.  irrelevant

(D) The author cites scientists who support the theory that over half of all species that ever existed have become extinct, but fails to mention any scientists who do not support that theory.  irrelevant

(E) The author provides no specific evidence that the species that have become extinct in modern times are the same species that would have become extinct in the absence of human technology.
 Correct. The flaw in reasoning is that the author fails to provide evidence for the argument

jaisonsunny77 · Answer

(A) The author mistakenly assumes that technology as not caused any harm to the environment.  -  the passage focuses on ''extinction'', not on whether there's any link between "technology" and "environmental harm".  
 
(B) The author ignores the fact that some species that are not yet extinct are in danger of extinction.  -  the author does not make this error. 
  
(C) The author fails to consider that there are probably species in existence that have not yet been identified and studied by scientists.  -  species ''not yet identified'' is out of scope.  
 
(D) The author cites scientists who support the theory that over half of all species that ever existed have become extinct, but fails to mention any scientists who do not support that theory.  -  it is irrelevant for us to know ''who'' supports the theory. 
 
(E) The author provides no specific evidence that the species that have become extinct in modern times are the same species that would have become extinct in the absence of human technology. - this is the missing link that we are looking for. The author does make the claim that ''the species that have become extinct in modern times would have become extinct by now even if humans had never acquired technology.'', without ever really providing any evidence to back up this claim. Hence,    (E) is the right answer choice.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

Species have been coming and going long before humans ever came along, and those who wish to blame recent extinctions on human technology and its consequent effects on the environment ignore the fact that extinction is a natural process that would be going on even if we were not around. In other words, the author argues that the more recent extinctions are just part of the same process that has been going on since before the environment was harmed by technology. However, she has failed to present any proof that the more recently extinct species would have definitely become extinct without our help.

(A) is mired in a scope shift—the author doesn't argue that technology has not harmed the environment in any way; all she argues is that damage to the environment didn't cause extinctions which wouldn't have otherwise occurred naturally.

(B) The author isn't ignoring this fact; it's just not important to her argument. These species aren't mentioned because they have no effect on her argument, not because she erroneously overlooks them.

(C) Once again, failing to consider something that has nothing to do with your argument is not a reasoning error. The existence of undiscovered species has no bearing on the argument that extinction is natural.

(D) is a distortion of the author's second statement. She doesn't identify a group of scientists that have this theory, she just says that scientists, in general, estimate that it's the case.

Answer: E

Extinction is the way of nature. Scientists estimate that over half of

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Extinction is the way of nature. Scientists estimate that over half of

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards