Grizzly bears are very dangerous. When people come close to a grizzly

The discrepancy here is today GB is more likely to attack human than BB. But 18 years ago, BB was more likely to attack human than GB.
I'm confused between C and E but finally choose E
because C just explain about the first part of the discrepancy while E explain why discrepancy happen=> resolve it
Go for E
Please let me know if anything in my logic go wrong. Thanks

Posted from my mobile device

Grizzly bears are very dangerous. When people come close to a grizzly bear, there is a much greater chance that they will be attacked by it than if they were to come close to a black bear.

In British Columbia, however, over the past eighteen years twice as many people were attacked by black bears than by grizzly bears.



A. Bears of both species will attack to protect their cubs from danger.
Irrelevant

B. Recently, more people than ever before have visited the British Columbia area.
But we do not know in what proportions they are attacked by Black and Grizzly bears

C. There are roughly ten times more black bears than there are grizzly bears in British Columbia.
OOh thats the reason i.e even if fewer chances are there that black bears will attach, because of higher volume overall attacks by black bears are more

D. Black bears have poorer eyesight than grizzly bears do.
Irrelevant

E. There are more grizzly bears today than there were eighteen years ago, whereas the number of black bears has remained the same.
Irrelevant

C is the answer

IMO C

Grizzly bears are very dangerous. When people come close to a grizzly bear, there is a much greater chance that they will be attacked by it than if they were to come close to a black bear. In British Columbia, however, over the past eighteen years twice as many people were attacked by black bears than by grizzly bears.

Which of the following, if true, would most contribute to an explanation of the facts above?

A. Bears of both species will attack to protect their cubs from danger.
Doesn't help us establish anything about who will attack more.

B. Recently, more people than ever before have visited the British Columbia area.
Irrelevant

C. There are roughly ten times more black bears than there are grizzly bears in British Columbia.
Correct, if the population of black bears is more, the attacks will be more.

D. Black bears have poorer eyesight than grizzly bears do.
How is this related to the attacks?

E. There are more grizzly bears today than there were eighteen years ago, whereas the number of black bears has remained the same.
Might be true, but this does not help us establish a relationship between the attacks and population.
Example : What if the same population of black bears attacked humans more?

Your logic is wrong because, E says that there’s an increase in black bears and number of grizzly bears is constant. That could mean black bears have increased from , let’s say, 2 to 5. Whereas grizzly bear has remained at a 1000. So the argument falls apart.

Summary: There is greater chance to be attacked by a Grizzly bear than a black bear and yet in British Columbia, in past 18 years twice the number of people have been attacked by black bears than grizzly bears.

We need to explain the paradox.


A. Bears of both species will attack to protect their cubs from danger.

Does not explain the numerical difference in the number of attacks. Eliminate

B. Recently, more people than ever before have visited the British Columbia area.

That does not mean they encountered either kind of bear. Eliminate

C. There are roughly ten times more black bears than there are grizzly bears in British Columbia.

Okay so, population Black bears is way higher than that of grizzly bear, making encounter with black bear more probable and hence higher probability of getting attacked by a black bear than grizzly bear. Looks good

D. Black bears have poorer eyesight than grizzly bears do.

That could explain why you need to get closer to them to get attacked but does not explain the higher number of attacks. Eliminate

E. There are more grizzly bears today than there were eighteen years ago, whereas the number of black bears has remained the same.

Higher population of grizzly bears than black bears goes against solving the paradox. Eliminate

Answer choice C is the correct answer, imo.

Grizzly bears are very dangerous. When people come close to a grizzly bear, there is a much greater chance that they will be attacked by it than if they were to come close to a black bear. In British Columbia, however, over the past eighteen years twice as many people were attacked by black bears than by grizzly bears.

Which of the following, if true, would most contribute to an explanation of the facts above?

A. Bears of both species will attack to protect their cubs from danger. -> They may attack, but it doesn't resolve the paradox, as why BB attacked more than GB. Incorrect.

B. Recently, more people than ever before have visited the British Columbia area. -> Irrelevant.

C. There are roughly ten times more black bears than there are grizzly bears in British Columbia. -> Even BB attacks less than GB, but what if BB are more in very high in numbers then lower attack probability may lead to twice victims. Let's keep it.

D. Black bears have poorer eyesight than grizzly bears do. -> Irrelevant.

E. There are more grizzly bears today than there were eighteen years ago, whereas the number of black bears has remained the same. -> if GB =9 and BB =10 then with higher attacking probability GB attacked more people in numbers. We need BB population to be very high compared to GB population. Incorrect.

So, I think C.

Conclusion:
In British Columbia over last 18 years people attacked by black bears = 2x
people attacked by grizzly bears = x

Premise: generally grizzly bears attack more people.

We need to find out a reason for the abnormal behavior of Black bear....


A. Bears of both species will attack to protect their cubs from danger. - Wrong, because, it speaks about both Bears.

B. Recently, more people than ever before have visited the British Columbia area. - Wrong, It doesn't speak about Bears

C. There are roughly ten times more black bears than there are grizzly bears in British Columbia. - Correct, Because It speaks about Bears and reason for abnormal behavior of black bear
(i.e) No.of Black bears are more and hence more people are prone to be attacked by black bear

D. Black bears have poorer eyesight than grizzly bears do. - Wrong , because it doesn't provide any reason for abnormal behavior of Black bear

E. There are more grizzly bears today than there were eighteen years ago, whereas the number of black bears has remained the same. - Wrong, because it doesn't provide any reason for abnormal behaviour of Black bear

Let’s look at the paradox in the stimulus

Grizzly bears are very dangerous.
When people come close to a grizzly bear, there is a much greater chance that they will be attacked by it than if they were to come close to a black bear.

HOWEVER

In British Columbia, over the past eighteen years twice as many people were attacked by black bears than by grizzly bears.

If the chance of getting attacked by a grizzly bear is more than the chance of getting attacked by a black bear, why is the case different in British Colombia. We need to look for an option that resolves the paradox present in the argument.


A. Bears of both species will attack to protect their cubs from danger.
Doesn’t help resolve the paradox. We need to find why is the case different in British Colombia. Eliminate.

B. Recently, more people than ever before have visited the British Columbia area.

Recently, more people than ever before have visited British Columbia. But why was it that many people were attacked by black bears than by grizzly bears? Doesn’t help resolve the paradox. Eliminate

C. There are roughly ten times more black bears than there are grizzly bears in British Columbia.

Option C helps resolve the paradox present in the argument.
There are roughly ten times more black bears than there are grizzly bears in British Columbia. This explains why more people were attacked by black bears than by grizzly bears. Correct.

D. Black bears have poorer eyesight than grizzly bears do.
Despite having poor eyesight, black bears attacked more people than Grizzly bears did. If anything, Option D only adds to the paradox present in the argument. Eliminate.

E. There are more grizzly bears today than there were eighteen years ago, whereas the number of black bears has remained the same.

If there are more grizzly bears today than there were eighteen years ago, why was it that more people were attacked by black bears than by grizzly bears? Doesn’t resolve the paradox. Eliminate.

Vishnupriya
GMAT Verbal SME