Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 27 Mar 2017, 17:59

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace,

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 851
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 105 [0], given: 0

If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Mar 2005, 01:11
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 100% (00:11) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

â€œIf the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction,â€
If you have any questions
New!
Director
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 903
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Mar 2005, 07:03
I don't see how (B) agrees with the Biologist's argument though.
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 284
Location: Germany
Followers: 2

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

### Show Tags

21 Mar 2005, 08:19
I have the same problem, Folaa.

Biologist: If deforestation continues at the present rate, Koala will approach extinction (not become extinct). There's a difference between approaching extinction (perhaps becoming an endangered species) and being completely extinct.

Politician: To save the Koala, simply stop deforestation. (Stop it completely - not slow down the rate and neither start reforestation)

(A) - Does not talk about the politician's claim
(B) - Against the politician, but does not talk about the biologist.
(C) - Noone's talking about reforestation here
(D) - Reforestation - again nobody's talking about planting new trees - all
they seem to be talking about is the rate at which deforestation is
taking place (the biologist) and whether or not to completely stop
deforestation (the politician)
(E) - For the biologist, but does not talk anything about the politician.

Anyone can throw some light on this one?
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 370 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Mar 2005, 22:38
Biologist:
- Deforestion continues at present rate, Koala will approach extincintion

Politician:
- Stop deforestation and koala will be save (not be extinct)

We want a statement that agrees the biologist, and disagrees with the politician

Which one of the following statements is consistent with the biologistâ€™s claim but not with the politicianâ€™s claim?

(A) Deforestation continues and the koala becomes extinct.
- consistent with both claims

(B) Deforestation is stopped and the koala becomes extinct.
Deforestation stopped --> Koala becomes extincit
Koala not extinct --> Deforestation not stopped (consistent with biologist's claim)

This is consistent with the biologist's claim and not consistent with the politian. The biologist says that if deforestation is not slowed down, koala will become extinct. However, it does not have to take a complete stop to achieve the aim of preserving the koalas. However, it contradicts the politician's claim that stopping deforestation will save the koalas.

(C) Reforestation begins and the koala survives.
- Reforestation is not the same as slowing down or stopping deforestation.

(D) Deforestation is slowed and the koala survives.
Deforestation is slowed --> Koala survives
Koala does not survive --> Deforestation is not slowed
- Consistent with biologists claim that slowing deforestation will help koala survive. But it does not contradict the politicain as well as it says koala will not survive if deforestation is not slowed (i.e. not stopped or faster)

(E) Deforestation is slowed and the koala approaches extinction
- does not agree with biologist

B it is.

Not sure if i'm right, just my thoughts as to how this should be solved.
Director
Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 610
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2005, 08:28
in the earlier post I picked D. but yup B makes more sense.
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1218
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 648 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2005, 10:00
[quote="Vithal"]â€œIf the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction,â€
Director
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 728
Location: Milwaukee
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2005, 22:41
The difference between B & D is very sutle here. You could argue either way, I don't think ETS would get into controversy like this. Can you reveal the source of this question?. Thanks
_________________

Praveen

Director
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 851
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 105 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2005, 01:10
praveen_rao7 wrote:
The difference between B & D is very sutle here. You could argue either way, I don't think ETS would get into controversy like this. Can you reveal the source of this question?. Thanks

LSAT material from one of the sites on the net
VP
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1117
Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 45 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2005, 01:52
My choice was D and then I've checked the previous post with the answer and the explanation.... not so clear....
Director
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 851
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 105 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2005, 02:27
chunjuwu wrote:

SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 335 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

25 Mar 2005, 14:42
praveen_rao7 wrote:
The difference between B & D is very sutle here. You could argue either way, I don't think ETS would get into controversy like this. Can you reveal the source of this question?. Thanks

There isn't any controversy or subtle difference between B and D. I see that chunjuwu has mastered the tricks of if x then y.
Manager
Joined: 02 Dec 2004
Posts: 227
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Mar 2005, 15:18
another approach

if x then y BUT that does not means that when y and then x. the politican claim falls into this trap. Find the choice that contradict with y and then x logic will take care of the problem. I remember this one and it is a good one.
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2004
Posts: 458
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 95 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Mar 2005, 16:16
[quote="Vithal"]â€œIf the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction,â€
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 370 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Mar 2005, 18:10
[quote="DLMD"][quote="Vithal"]â€œIf the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction,â€
Manager
Joined: 11 May 2010
Posts: 221
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 123 [0], given: 11

### Show Tags

26 Aug 2010, 01:13
ywilfred wrote:
Biologist:
- Deforestion continues at present rate, Koala will approach extincintion

Politician:
- Stop deforestation and koala will be save (not be extinct)

We want a statement that agrees the biologist, and disagrees with the politician

Which one of the following statements is consistent with the biologistâ€™s claim but not with the politicianâ€™s claim?

(A) Deforestation continues and the koala becomes extinct.
- consistent with both claims

(B) Deforestation is stopped and the koala becomes extinct.
Deforestation stopped --> Koala becomes extincit
Koala not extinct --> Deforestation not stopped (consistent with biologist's claim)

This is consistent with the biologist's claim and not consistent with the politian. The biologist says that if deforestation is not slowed down, koala will become extinct. However, it does not have to take a complete stop to achieve the aim of preserving the koalas. However, it contradicts the politician's claim that stopping deforestation will save the koalas.

B it is.

Not sure if i'm right, just my thoughts as to how this should be solved.

Can you explain B again, I still don't get it.
Re:   [#permalink] 26 Aug 2010, 01:13
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
United Lumber will use trees from its forests for two products. 1 25 Jan 2015, 22:28
3 During the past three years of its present administration, 5 11 Apr 2011, 12:37
6 CR: If the forest continues to disappear 13 21 Mar 2008, 05:07
4 If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, 10 30 Jan 2008, 04:21
If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, 25 18 Nov 2007, 20:24
Display posts from previous: Sort by