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

It is currently 03 Aug 2020, 19:32

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

Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Posts: 313
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
Re: Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jul 2020, 08:38
CAMANISHPARMAR wrote:
Bad question, I don't agree with the explanation.


please check the question again: "Which of the following would, if true, most seriously weaken the farmer's argument?"

Do you have other option that can weaken the statement better than option C?

it's a OG2020 NEW QUESTION. There would be more similar questions on the way forward. Questions would be asked in such a way that one option would be slightly preferred over the other options.
VP
VP
User avatar
V
Joined: 11 Feb 2015
Posts: 1192
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 02 Jul 2020, 18:40
itsSKR wrote:
CAMANISHPARMAR wrote:
Bad question, I don't agree with the explanation.


please check the question again: "Which of the following would, if true, most seriously weaken the farmer's argument?"

Do you have other option that can weaken the statement better than option C?

it's a OG2020 NEW QUESTION. There would be more similar questions on the way forward. Questions would be asked in such a way that one option would be slightly preferred over the other options.


Yes, I have checked and I don't agree.

The question boils down to several people have seen ....blah blah blah.....but the argument weakens because they were alone. While I understand why and how it weakens but this is a pathetic way to weaken the argument. I agree with MartyTargetTestPrep and his post here. In fact, the same argument might be perceived in a slightly different manner but exactly the opposite way such as, so what the people were alone? collectively more than one person seeing the same thing might be perceived as a "strengthener". To make my point let us consider a hypothetical situation:-

In a court of law, if a case is going on and a person A sees from point/location X that a person F murdered person Q and no one was with the person A, then the Judge will still consider A as an eye witness but might doubt that since A was alone, is he lying? etc.... Now if at the same point of time if another person B sees from point/location Y the same murder happening but A is not aware that B is seeing the same murder and vice versa, the judge will feel more confident about the situation now that two persons have seen the same thing, i.e. the same phenomenon can also be seen as a "strengthener" if perceived differently. The defense lawyer's argument that both the persons, A and B, were alone will not hold. The opposition lawyer will say more than one person has seen person F committing the crime. If we keep adding more eyewitnesses in this manner then it will only strengthen the argument that F has committed the crime and not weaken it. Now, you can substitute the aforesaid example with people and lions, and you will understand the point I make.

That's why I still feel this is a non-sense question and complete crap. I have seen some amazing official questions of difficulty at the 75% level and above. I hope GMAC maintains its quality control in the future and tests the candidates with amazing questions and not crapy ones such as above.
_________________
Manish

Originally posted by CAMANISHPARMAR on 02 Jul 2020, 08:55.
Last edited by CAMANISHPARMAR on 02 Jul 2020, 18:40, edited 1 time in total.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
V
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 3362
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jul 2020, 18:37
2
This question has led to a lot of debate (which is great!), but there is only one correct option here: C.

The farmer says the following things:
1. It is thought that mountain lions were driven from the entire region ~20 years ago.
2. But several people say that they've seen a mountain lion in the suburban outskirts.
3. These reports are spread over the past few years, "the latest just last month".
4. These "several people" ~have no reason to lie.
5. Therefore, local wildlife managers should begin to urgently address the mountain lion's presence. ← This is the conclusion.

We are asked to pick the option that (most seriously) weakens the farmer's argument.

A. The farmer doesn't really link the action he or she recommends to the safety of fully-grown animals. Maybe we're worried about attacks on children, or on human beings in general. Also, this option uses "generally", which leaves open the possibility of occasional attacks on fully-grown animals. Finally, it is possible that the mountain lion(s) will kill younger animals.

B. This is a strengthener. If mountain lions don't look like other wild animals, the "several people" are less likely to have mistaken some other wild animal for a mountain lion.

C. "No person who claimed to have seen a mountain lion had anyone else with them at the purported sighting."

Let's go through this statement carefully. Every one of the several people was alone at the time of the alleged sighting. Not one or two, but every single one of the several people, over a period of a few years. If there is a mountain lion (or mountain lions) in the area, how likely is it that it has not been spotted by a group of at least two people at least once? Why exactly does every sighting involve at most one person?

Maybe a single person is more likely to run as soon as he or she thinks there's a mountain lion around? Having someone else there means having more "eyes" on the situation. Having someone else there may also allow a person to stand their ground a little longer, enough to confirm that they did not, in fact, see a mountain lion. We cannot be sure, but the point is that this option gives us some reason to think that there is something a little unexpected happening (reports over a few years seem to somehow always involve a single person).

Now, is it possible to weaken this? Of course it is! Maybe mountain lions sneak up only on individuals, but why would they show themselves only to individuals if they were not hunting those individuals (the people who reported sightings did not report any attacks). We could just go in circles here, weakening an attempt to weaken the correct option by saying that maybe these sightings are like sightings of the Abominable Snowman. Maybe these individuals are aware of some of the earlier reports, and therefore already primed to report the most harmless of things as a mountain lion (I've read way too many Jim Corbett books :)). Or we could just keep this option and take a look at the remaining options.

D. The farmer is looking at a period of a few years, so it's not particularly useful to know that there were no migrations in the past year.

E. The option goes with "more than half", but given that mountain lions were driven out ~20 years ago, and that the reports in the last few years are from "several" people, I would actually expect way more than just half of the people in the region to say that they've never seen a mountain lion before. That is, this statement is not inconsistent with occasional sightings.

I'll say this again: the GMAT does not owe anyone anything other than one option that is better than the other four options in any one question. Do not go in expecting anything more than that. Not in RC, not in SC, and definitely not in CR.
_________________
VP
VP
User avatar
V
Joined: 11 Feb 2015
Posts: 1192
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jul 2020, 20:58
AjiteshArun wrote:
This question has led to a lot of debate (which is great!), but there is only one correct option here: C.

The farmer says the following things:
1. It is thought that mountain lions were driven from the entire region ~20 years ago.
2. But several people say that they've seen a mountain lion in the suburban outskirts.
3. These reports are spread over the past few years, "the latest just last month".
4. These "several people" ~have no reason to lie.
5. Therefore, local wildlife managers should begin to urgently address the mountain lion's presence. ← This is the conclusion.

We are asked to pick the option that (most seriously) weakens the farmer's argument.

A. The farmer doesn't really link the action he or she recommends to the safety of fully-grown animals. Maybe we're worried about attacks on children, or on human beings in general. Also, this option uses "generally", which leaves open the possibility of occasional attacks on fully-grown animals. Finally, it is possible that the mountain lion(s) will kill younger animals.

B. This is a strengthener. If mountain lions don't look like other wild animals, the "several people" are less likely to have mistaken some other wild animal for a mountain lion.

C. "No person who claimed to have seen a mountain lion had anyone else with them at the purported sighting."

Let's go through this statement carefully. Every one of the several people was alone at the time of the alleged sighting. Not one or two, but every single one of the several people, over a period of a few years. If there is a mountain lion (or mountain lions) in the area, how likely is it that it has not been spotted by a group of at least two people at least once? Why exactly does every sighting involve at most one person?

Maybe a single person is more likely to run as soon as he or she thinks there's a mountain lion around? Having someone else there means having more "eyes" on the situation. Having someone else there may also allow a person to stand their ground a little longer, enough to confirm that they did not, in fact, see a mountain lion. We cannot be sure, but the point is that this option gives us some reason to think that there is something a little unexpected happening (reports over a few years seem to somehow always involve a single person).

Now, is it possible to weaken this? Of course it is! Maybe mountain lions sneak up only on individuals, but why would they show themselves only to individuals if they were not hunting those individuals (the people who reported sightings did not report any attacks). We could just go in circles here, weakening an attempt to weaken the correct option by saying that maybe these sightings are like sightings of the Abominable Snowman. Maybe these individuals are aware of some of the earlier reports, and therefore already primed to report the most harmless of things as a mountain lion (I've read way too many Jim Corbett books :)). Or we could just keep this option and take a look at the remaining options.

D. The farmer is looking at a period of a few years, so it's not particularly useful to know that there were no migrations in the past year.

E. The option goes with "more than half", but given that mountain lions were driven out ~20 years ago, and that the reports in the last few years are from "several" people, I would actually expect way more than just half of the people in the region to say that they've never seen a mountain lion before. That is, this statement is not inconsistent with occasional sightings.

I'll say this again: the GMAT does not owe anyone anything other than one option that is better than the other four options in any one question. Do not go in expecting anything more than that. Not in RC, not in SC, and definitely not in CR.


Yeah, thanks Ajitesh! within the GMAT framework it is better if the students keep such a mindset for better results!

Posted from my mobile device
_________________
Manish
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 09 Jan 2018
Posts: 22
Re: Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jul 2020, 02:12
[quote="AjiteshArun"]

AjiteshArun

Thanks, I guess you are right.
I would like to know how to reach the next level of answering questions? say from 600 to 700 lvl.
At this point i have a very good accuracy 500 level (100%) 600 level (+85%), but only 25% in 700 lvl.

I want to reach at least above 65% accuracy in this 700 level.
Some 700 lvl questions in SC i am able to answer if given 3 or 4 minutes, but it is not the same case with CR & RC.
Do I revisit concepts ? or Do more 700 lvl Questions? Deeper Error Logs?

Because I feel that each 700 Lvl has its own different method or concept that it tests and is unique, be it SC / CR ? RC.
Any tips please.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
V
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 3362
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Re: Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jul 2020, 19:35
vishaldec4 wrote:
AjiteshArun

Thanks, I guess you are right.
I would like to know how to reach the next level of answering questions? say from 600 to 700 lvl.
At this point i have a very good accuracy 500 level (100%) 600 level (+85%), but only 25% in 700 lvl.

I want to reach at least above 65% accuracy in this 700 level.
Some 700 lvl questions in SC i am able to answer if given 3 or 4 minutes, but it is not the same case with CR & RC.
Do I revisit concepts ? or Do more 700 lvl Questions? Deeper Error Logs?

Because I feel that each 700 Lvl has its own different method or concept that it tests and is unique, be it SC / CR ? RC.
Any tips please.
Hi vishaldec4,

I don't know enough about you to identify what you need to work on, but here are some relevant observations (opinions, nothing more):
1. I don't think that it's the concepts that change when the difficulty level changes. The GMAT seems to test the same set of things, just in different ways.
2. I feel that basic error logs can help, but very detailed error logs are a waste of time. Apart from taking a lot of time to set up and maintain, very detailed logs create a lot of unreliable data.
3. Patience and perseverance are underrated.
_________________
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 04 Dec 2015
Posts: 193
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jul 2020, 14:19
AjiteshArun

Please help.

Initially going through the answer choices, I narrowed it down to C, although I was not really sure about answer choice A. I read A again and it got me thinking, I mean the farmers in the suburban outskirts mostly raise cattle and hogs which *when fully grown* are generally not attacked by the mountain lions, but what about when these cattle and hogs are young, maybe they are an easy target for the mountain lions. So if this is the case, then maybe the farmers do have a reason to make false claims. The farmer has claimed that because the people don’t have any reason to make false claims, then the people must be telling the truth, but what if the farmers did have a reason— I was thinking on these lines. Hence the confusion.

Please help

The weird part about this option is that even if people do have a reason to make false claims, the conclusion still remains very much valid. Also, we don’t know if the people whom the farmer is referring to are themselves farmers.

Maybe I am thinking too much

Regards,

Posted from my mobile device
CEO
CEO
User avatar
V
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 3362
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Re: Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jul 2020, 20:29
INSEADIESE wrote:
AjiteshArun

Please help.

Initially going through the answer choices, I narrowed it down to C, although I was not really sure about answer choice A. I read A again and it got me thinking, I mean the farmers in the suburban outskirts mostly raise cattle and hogs which *when fully grown* are generally not attacked by the mountain lions, but what about when these cattle and hogs are young, maybe they are an easy target for the mountain lions. So if this is the case, then maybe the farmers do have a reason to make false claims. The farmer has claimed that because the people don’t have any reason to make false claims, then the people must be telling the truth, but what if the farmers did have a reason— I was thinking on these lines. Hence the confusion.

Please help

The weird part about this option is that even if people do have a reason to make false claims, the conclusion still remains very much valid. Also, we don’t know if the people whom the farmer is referring to are themselves farmers.

Maybe I am thinking too much

Regards,
Hi INSEADIESE,

You've diagnosed this correctly: too much thinking. :)

When we look at option A, which says that ~mountain lions don't generally attack fully-grown animals, what we should check is whether that is a good reason to say that ~local wildlife managers should not begin to urgently address the mountain lion's presence. On its own, option A is not enough, because we have no reason to think that the threat (the reason that local wildlife managers should act) is limited to fully-grown animals raised by farmers.
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen   [#permalink] 13 Jul 2020, 20:29

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 48 posts ] 

Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne