Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 06:44 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 06:44
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   4   
655-705 Level|   Weaken|                     
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 16 May 2022, 08:31
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avigutman

Yes, jabhatta2, there are NO regional reports (note the word "lack" in my initial response).
And, I agree with your interpretation of who's writing the reports (some kind of government agency).
Show more

Hi avigutman - hmm in that case -- i am afraid - i do so (D) as a weakener

Quote:

Analogy - Avi : I have seen aliens on earth

Strengthener : there are MANY reports suggesting aliens are migrating from mars to earth ....this is a strengthener, reinforcing what Avi has claimed
Weakener : there are ZERO reports suggesting aliens are migrating from mars to earth ....this is a weakener because it eliminates a strengthener
Show more
User avatar
avigutman
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,293
Own Kudos:
1,930
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,293
Kudos: 1,930
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 16 May 2022, 08:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
I do see (D) as a weakener

Quote:

Analogy - Avi : I have seen aliens on earth

Strengthener : there are MANY reports suggesting aliens are migrating from mars to earth ....this is a strengthener, reinforcing what Avi has claimed
Weakener : there are ZERO reports suggesting aliens are migrating from mars to earth ....this is a weakener because it eliminates a strengthener
Show more

Let's tweak answer D slightly jabhatta2 (just changing one word):
(D) There have been no regional reports in the past week of mountain lions migrating to the area.
Can you compare this to the original, please?
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen Updated on: 16 May 2022, 09:15
Originally posted by jabhatta2 on 16 May 2022, 08:52.
Last edited by jabhatta2 on 16 May 2022, 09:15, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avigutman

(D-tweaked) There have been no regional reports (in the past week) (of mountain lions migrating to the area)
Can you compare this to the original, please?
Show more

This original is this
(D - original) There have been no regional reports (in the past year) (of lions migrating to the area)


the only difference is week vs year

Using SC -- i think prepositional phrases - "in the past week" and "in the past year" refer to when the reports were drafted and NOT when the migration is actually occuring.

On 2nd thought -- maybe i am wrong about that ...maybe the lions have been migrating only for the last year or the last week respectively.

Not 100 % sure what does the prepositional phrase "in the past week" and "in the past year" modify ..

Irrespective,
"in the past week" OR "in the past year" === either variation of (D) weakens IMO
User avatar
avigutman
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,293
Own Kudos:
1,930
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,293
Kudos: 1,930
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 16 May 2022, 09:13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
avigutman

(D-tweaked) There have been no regional reports in the past week of mountain lions migrating to the area.
Can you compare this to the original, please?

This original is this
(D - original) There have been no regional reports in the past year of lions migrating to the area.


the only difference is week vs year

Using SC -- i think prepositional phrases - "in the past week" and "in the past year" refer to when the reports were drafted and NOT when the migration is actually occuring.

On 2nd thought -- maybe i am wrong about that ...maybe the lions have been migrating only for the last year or the last week respectively.

Not 100 % sure what does the prepositional phrase "in the past week" and "in the past year" modify ..

Irrespective, "in the past week" or "in the past year" === either varation of D weakens IMO
Show more

Do they weaken by the same amount, jabhatta2? If not, why not?
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 16 May 2022, 12:51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi avigutman - i can see the focus is on the times mentioned in the grey highlights (in the pic) - few years ago AND last month

But if you read the green higlight -- the conclusion is saying -- Need to be on the lookout NOW (present tense)

Thus i think (D') is better contender for weakener because it referring to a time closer to the present tense.
Attachments

Pci 1.JPG
Pci 1.JPG [ 105.43 KiB | Viewed 2017 times ]

User avatar
avigutman
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,293
Own Kudos:
1,930
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,293
Kudos: 1,930
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 16 May 2022, 15:17
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
Hi avigutman - i can see the focus is on the times mentioned in the grey highlights (in the pic) - few years ago AND last month

But if you read the green higlight -- the conclusion is saying -- Need to be on the lookout NOW (present tense)

Thus i think (D') is better contender for weakener because it referring to a time closer to the present tense.
Show more

I'm afraid you have it the wrong way around, jabhatta2. The longer the period of time with NO reports, the more impact it has.
Consider these two options, when deciding which region you'd rather live in:
(1) There have been no regional reports in the past two minutes of robberies in the area.
(2) There have been no regional reports in the past two decades of robberies in the area.
Which of those gives you more comfort?
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 17 May 2022, 07:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avigutman


I'm afraid you have it the wrong way around, jabhatta2. The longer the period of time with NO reports, the more impact it has.
Consider these two options, when deciding which region you'd rather live in:
(1) There have been no regional reports in the past two minutes of robberies in the area.
(2) There have been no regional reports in the past two decades of robberies in the area.
Which of those gives you more comfort?
Show more

Hi avigutman - (2) is better...

In my analogy and i can see why (C) is better than any of the variations of (D)

thank you for your assistance so much...


Quote:

Real estate agent: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen robbers in the suburban outskirts—the latest just last month—and, while Robbers were thought to have been driven from this entire region about twenty years ago, there is no reason for the people who reported seeing a robber to have deliberately concocted a false report. Therefore, local police should begin to urgently address the robbers’ presence.
(C) No person who claimed to have seen a thief had anyone else with them at the purported sighting.
(D1) There have been no local reports in the past two minutes of robberies in the area.
(D2) There have been no local reports in the past two decades of robberies in the area.
(D3) There have been no local reports in the past year of robberies in the area
Show more
User avatar
ashutosh_73
User avatar
Joined: 19 Jan 2018
Last visit: 30 Oct 2024
Posts: 234
Own Kudos:
1,637
Given Kudos: 86
Location: India
Posts: 234
Kudos: 1,637
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 02 Dec 2023, 00:22
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen a mountain lion in the suburban outskirts—the latest just last month—and, while mountain lions were thought to have been driven from this entire region about twenty years ago, there is no reason for the people who reported seeing a mountain lion to have deliberately concocted a false report. Therefore, local wildlife managers should begin to urgently address the mountain lion's presence.

Which of the following would, if true, most seriously weaken the farmer's argument?

A. Farmers in the suburban outskirts mostly raise cattle and hogs, which when fully grown are generally not attacked by mountain lions.
B. Mountain lions are dissimilar in size and color to other wild animals found near the suburban outskirts.
C. No person who claimed to have seen a mountain lion had anyone else with them at the purported sighting.
D. There have been no regional reports in the past year of mountain lions migrating to the area.
E. Recent surveys show that more than half of the people in the region report that they have never seen a mountain lion before.


Argument:

- Several people claimed to have seen a mountain lion in this region.
- These people have no reason to lie.

Conclusion: Hence, we should start addressing this problem (implying mountain lions are present in this region)
Show more


Hi KarishmaB GMATNinja ReedArnoldMPREP

Although i have got this question using POE, i have a v.basic query:
I have learned that, premises in given CR ques are always TRUE, and we should never question the premise, as suggested in the various posters in the below ''Florida Alligator OG ques''

https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-the-1960s ... 39-20.html

But in this ''Mountain Lion'' question, aren't we weakening the premise itself? We are basically saying that those sightings are ''NOT 100% validated''

''Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen a mountain lion''

Please help!
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,994
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,994
 [1]
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 02 Dec 2023, 07:06
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ashutosh_73
Quote:
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen a mountain lion in the suburban outskirts—the latest just last month—and, while mountain lions were thought to have been driven from this entire region about twenty years ago, there is no reason for the people who reported seeing a mountain lion to have deliberately concocted a false report. Therefore, local wildlife managers should begin to urgently address the mountain lion's presence.

Which of the following would, if true, most seriously weaken the farmer's argument?

A. Farmers in the suburban outskirts mostly raise cattle and hogs, which when fully grown are generally not attacked by mountain lions.
B. Mountain lions are dissimilar in size and color to other wild animals found near the suburban outskirts.
C. No person who claimed to have seen a mountain lion had anyone else with them at the purported sighting.
D. There have been no regional reports in the past year of mountain lions migrating to the area.
E. Recent surveys show that more than half of the people in the region report that they have never seen a mountain lion before.


Argument:

- Several people claimed to have seen a mountain lion in this region.
- These people have no reason to lie.

Conclusion: Hence, we should start addressing this problem (implying mountain lions are present in this region)


Hi KarishmaB GMATNinja ReedArnoldMPREP

Although i have got this question using POE, i have a v.basic query:
I have learned that, premises in given CR ques are always TRUE, and we should never question the premise, as suggested in the various posters in the below ''Florida Alligator OG ques''

https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-the-1960s ... 39-20.html

But in this ''Mountain Lion'' question, aren't we weakening the premise itself? We are basically saying that those sightings are ''NOT 100% validated''

''Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen a mountain lion''

Please help!
Show more

Notice the wording: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen a mountain lion... (not '...have seen a mountain lion')

(C) No person who claimed to have seen a mountain lion had anyone else with them at the purported sighting. (not 'No person who saw a ...')

The point is that the author himself is asking you to doubt whether the people saw the lion or not.

e.g. If I say, "You claim to have worked 40 hrs last week but..." and if I say, "You worked 40 hrs last week...," only in the second case is this a fact. In the first case, it is just your claim; it may not be a fact. It is a fact that you made this claim. But did you actually do it, I don't know.

Check out this video in which I discuss how this official question is different from the alligator official question because of this wording:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55QgRwZmFRo

SignUp - You might find this link useful too.
User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
 [1]
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
 [1]
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 02 Dec 2023, 08:56
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ashutosh_73
Quote:
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen a mountain lion in the suburban outskirts—the latest just last month—and, while mountain lions were thought to have been driven from this entire region about twenty years ago, there is no reason for the people who reported seeing a mountain lion to have deliberately concocted a false report. Therefore, local wildlife managers should begin to urgently address the mountain lion's presence.

Which of the following would, if true, most seriously weaken the farmer's argument?

A. Farmers in the suburban outskirts mostly raise cattle and hogs, which when fully grown are generally not attacked by mountain lions.
B. Mountain lions are dissimilar in size and color to other wild animals found near the suburban outskirts.
C. No person who claimed to have seen a mountain lion had anyone else with them at the purported sighting.
D. There have been no regional reports in the past year of mountain lions migrating to the area.
E. Recent surveys show that more than half of the people in the region report that they have never seen a mountain lion before.


Argument:

- Several people claimed to have seen a mountain lion in this region.
- These people have no reason to lie.

Conclusion: Hence, we should start addressing this problem (implying mountain lions are present in this region)


Hi KarishmaB GMATNinja ReedArnoldMPREP

Although i have got this question using POE, i have a v.basic query:
I have learned that, premises in given CR ques are always TRUE, and we should never question the premise, as suggested in the various posters in the below ''Florida Alligator OG ques''

https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-the-1960s ... 39-20.html

But in this ''Mountain Lion'' question, aren't we weakening the premise itself? We are basically saying that those sightings are ''NOT 100% validated''

''Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen a mountain lion''

Please help!
Show more

Hi there. Great question.

First off, the advice to 'not doubt a premise' is *almost* always true. There are a *few* questions where 'doubting a premise' can be helpful. This one falls right on the border!

Notice what the premise says: "many people claim to have seen a mountain lion."

What would it mean to doubt that premise? We doubt that many people have *claimed* that.

That is, "Maybe actually, only a few people has claimed to see a mountain lion, several times?" or "maybe actually only one person, as a prank, is submitting all the claims of mountain lion sightings?"

It would also doubt the premise to say, "Actually, most of those claims were mis-filed, and the claims people made were that they saw a bob-cat."

That is to say, to doubt the premise would be to doubt the amount and quality of the *claims*.

But we're allowed to wonder, "Well, they *claim* to see a mountain lion, but maybe they didn't?"

Notice the difference between:

"Many people claim to have seen a mountain lion"

and

"Many people *have seen* a mountain lion."

In the second situation, we would *not* be allowed to say, "Actually, no they didn't."

Notice that the GMAT has given you a hint: There's no reason to think people have 'deliberately concocted a false report.'

...But what about *accidentally* concocting a false report? Thinking you see a mountain lion, making the claim... but being wrong? That's still allowed to ponder.
User avatar
MishalSen1
User avatar
Joined: 01 Mar 2022
Last visit: 27 Aug 2024
Posts: 12
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 21
Location: India
Posts: 12
Kudos: 2
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 19 Jan 2024, 23:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can't wrap my head around option C when the passage tells us that "there is no reason for the people who reported seeing a mountain lion to have deliberately concocted a false report"?

I chose D as it seems to me like the best answer choice.

Any thoughts please?
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,994
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,994
 [1]
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 20 Jan 2024, 00:35
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
MishalSen1
Can't wrap my head around option C when the passage tells us that "there is no reason for the people who reported seeing a mountain lion to have deliberately concocted a false report"?

I chose D as it seems to me like the best answer choice.

Any thoughts please?
Show more

(D) has incorrect timeline. We are talking about reports of sightings in the past few years.
D talks about no reports of migrations in the past year. Just talking about past year makes no sense. So we don't even need to evaluate the other aspects of this option.

This video explains why the answer here is (C) and compares this question with another very similar one but with a different answer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55QgRwZmFRo
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,080
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,080
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 20 Jan 2024, 22:15
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
MishalSen1
Can't wrap my head around option C when the passage tells us that "there is no reason for the people who reported seeing a mountain lion to have deliberately concocted a false report"?

I chose D as it seems to me like the best answer choice.

Any thoughts please?
Show more
Hi MishalSen1,

To address your first point, we can attack any part of the argument, including statements like "there is no reason for the people who reported seeing a mountain lion to have deliberately concocted a false report". That is, the correct option could help us see that there is absolutely some reason or incentive for people to deliberately concoct false reports.

However, keep in mind that in this case the correct option works just as well if those people mistakenly (that is, not deliberately) reported seeing a mountain lion.
User avatar
PReciSioN
User avatar
Joined: 17 Dec 2023
Last visit: 14 Apr 2025
Posts: 95
Own Kudos:
77
Given Kudos: 47
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
Posts: 95
Kudos: 77
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 01 Feb 2024, 02:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi GMATNinja KarishmaB MartyMurray

What if option E said - "Recent surveys show that most of the people in the region report that they have never seen a mountain lion before."
In this case would option E be a correct choice.

Another question. Quantifier words usually have acceptable ranges like

all - 100%
Not all - 0-99%
None - 0%
Some - 1-100%

What does most mean in this sense. Is it a number close to a 100% or is "most" similar to "majority" in the sense it could be anything from 51% to 100%.


Also (sorry for the multiple doubts haha), what would be the ranges of words like few, many.

I assume few would possibly be anything less than 50% (we can't really justify using few if it is more than 50%, I believe) and many could be anything from 1% to 100% (so same as some in this regard?)


Thanks!!!
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,994
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,994
 [1]
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 04 Feb 2024, 00:35
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
PReciSioN
Hi GMATNinja KarishmaB MartyMurray

What if option E said - "Recent surveys show that most of the people in the region report that they have never seen a mountain lion before."
In this case would option E be a correct choice.

Another question. Quantifier words usually have acceptable ranges like

all - 100%
Not all - 0-99%
None - 0%
Some - 1-100%

What does most mean in this sense. Is it a number close to a 100% or is "most" similar to "majority" in the sense it could be anything from 51% to 100%.


Also (sorry for the multiple doubts haha), what would be the ranges of words like few, many.

I assume few would possibly be anything less than 50% (we can't really justify using few if it is more than 50%, I believe) and many could be anything from 1% to 100% (so same as some in this regard?)


Thanks!!!





 
Show more
'Most' means 'majority'/ 'more than 50%'  so nothing would change in the option. Quanitifiers are often used to depict the intent of the author. 'Few' would mean 'hardly any'. 'A few' woud mean 'some'. 'Many' would mean a substantial number. You don't have to worry about giving a percentage to each of these quantifiers. Understand the intent of the author. 
User avatar
PReciSioN
User avatar
Joined: 17 Dec 2023
Last visit: 14 Apr 2025
Posts: 95
Own Kudos:
77
Given Kudos: 47
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
Posts: 95
Kudos: 77
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 05 Feb 2024, 03:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB

PReciSioN
Hi GMATNinja KarishmaB MartyMurray

What if option E said - "Recent surveys show that most of the people in the region report that they have never seen a mountain lion before."
In this case would option E be a correct choice.

Another question. Quantifier words usually have acceptable ranges like

all - 100%
Not all - 0-99%
None - 0%
Some - 1-100%

What does most mean in this sense. Is it a number close to a 100% or is "most" similar to "majority" in the sense it could be anything from 51% to 100%.


Also (sorry for the multiple doubts haha), what would be the ranges of words like few, many.

I assume few would possibly be anything less than 50% (we can't really justify using few if it is more than 50%, I believe) and many could be anything from 1% to 100% (so same as some in this regard?)


Thanks!!!







 
'Most' means 'majority'/ 'more than 50%'  so nothing would change in the option. Quanitifiers are often used to depict the intent of the author. 'Few' would mean 'hardly any'. 'A few' woud mean 'some'. 'Many' would mean a substantial number. You don't have to worry about giving a percentage to each of these quantifiers. Understand the intent of the author. 

 
Show more

Understood! But when we have to negate / take the logical opposite (as opposed to taking the polar opposite of these quantifiers), would we do something like this - logical opposite of few = not few ( more than few / a significant number more than hardly any) - logical opposite of a few = (Not a few / none) ?
Thanks!! :)
User avatar
skmaan
User avatar
Joined: 16 Mar 2023
Last visit: 25 Oct 2025
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
5
Given Kudos: 20
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: Darden '26
GPA: 7.84
WE:Project Management (Consulting)
Schools: Darden '26
Posts: 16
Kudos: 5
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 05 Feb 2024, 13:26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Query regarding passage understanding:

Is there any significance of 'deliberately concocting' ? eg. an actual false report would be mis-identifying another animal but it is not deliberate or concoction ?

C indicates that since there are no witnesses to ML sighting there is a chance of deliberate concoction of false reports or it could be an actual false report (eg given above)

Shouldn't the correct option just point towards deliberate concoction of false reporting only, why both cases?
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,080
 [1]
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,080
 [1]
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 05 Feb 2024, 23:01
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
skmaan

Shouldn't the correct option just point towards deliberate concoction of false reporting only, why both cases?
Show more
­Hi skmaan,

We should try not to restrict ourselves to deliberate concoctions of false reports, because the question is quite open-ended. It just asks us to pick an option that would "most seriously weaken the farmer's argument". One way to do that is {false reports}. Another way is {mistaken sightings}.

More importantly, we don't really need to worry about which of the two is happening here. Option C works either way.
User avatar
MartyMurray
User avatar
Joined: 11 Aug 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,630
Own Kudos:
6,122
 [1]
Given Kudos: 173
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 1,630
Kudos: 6,122
 [1]
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 06 Feb 2024, 12:03
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
PReciSioN
 be 
But when we have to negate / take the logical opposite (as opposed to taking the polar opposite of these quantifiers), would we do something like this - logical opposite of few = not few ( more than few / a significant number more than hardly any) - logical opposite of a few = (Not a few / none) 
Show more
When we negate a statement, we determine what the main point of the statement is and negate that point.

So, since "few are" means "not many are," the negation would be "many are."

How we would negate "a few" is a little tougher to call, but probably the negation is "none.," as you suggested.

So, it appears that you get the idea.

 ­
User avatar
KaranB1
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2018
Last visit: 22 Oct 2025
Posts: 121
Own Kudos:
189
Given Kudos: 153
Location: India
Schools: IIMA WBS '22
GMAT 1: 640 Q46 V32
GMAT 2: 710 Q49 V38
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: IIMA WBS '22
GMAT 2: 710 Q49 V38
Posts: 121
Kudos: 189
Farmer: Several people in the past few years have claimed to have seen 12 Aug 2024, 14:22
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(E) Recent surveys show that more than half of the people in the region report that they have never seen a mountain lion before.

Answer choice E implies that people who claimed to have seen the mountain lions in the suburban outskirts MIGHT have never
seen a mountain lions before. Isn't this a strong weaker?


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

I agree that this answer choice is a weaker too. But the point is according to the prompt Several people in the
past few years have claimed to have seen a mountain lion. Although a single person could have made a mistake,
but in this there are many people claimed to have seen a mountain lion.

Please help me understand why C is better?

KarishmaB
AjiteshArun
GMATNinja
   1   2   3   4   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
188 posts