In Merina commercial fossil hunters often sell important fossils they

In Merina commercial fossil hunters often sell important fossils they have found, not to universities or museums, but to individual collectors, who pay much better but generally do not allow researchers access to their collections. To increase the number of fossils available for research, some legislators propose requiring all fossils that are found in Merina to be sold only to universities or museums.

Boil it down - To increase the number of fossils available for research, some legislators propose requiring all fossils that are found in Merina to be sold only to universities or museums.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that the legislators' proposal will fail to achieve its goal?

(A) Some fossil hunters in Merina are not commercial fossil hunters, but rather are amateurs who keep the fossils that they find. - Irrelevant - as we are only concerned about those fossil hunters who sell the fossils which they have found

(B) Most fossils found in Merina are common types that have little scientific interest. - iSWAT - There are a few fossils that a scientific interest. Also , most of fossils will have some value for research
(C) Commercial fossil hunters in Merina currently sell some of the fossils they find to universities and museums. - Incorrect - the legislators only want to increase the number of fossils sold to universities and museums .

(D) Many universities in Merina do not engage in fossil research. - Irrelevant - the fossils can be sold to other universities or museums .

(E) Most fossils are found by commercial fossil hunters, and they would give up looking for fossils if they were no longer allowed to sell to individual collectors.- Correct - the commercial fossil hunters will not have the incentive to find fossils if they aren't allowed to sell to individual collectors
_________________

Hi...Strengthen/Weaken question calls for REAL WORLD way of thinking...
Break it down to our normal language...

My Researcher friend says: Comm. fossil hunters are selling max of their fossils to Private firms than the univ
Me: Y
Researcher friend: Dude they make more profit but we dont get to study those fossils as the Private firms dont allow us to see those
Me: Ohh!!! sad
Researcher Friend: Dont worry. A new law has been proposed in which they have to sell only to UNIV and not to private firms
Me: Great... You can now study more new fossils

MAIN POINT: New Rule will increase accessibility of the number of fossil for researcher.
Any choice that address THIS DIRECTLY is our answer.

A) Some fossil hunters in Merina are not commercial fossil hunters, but rather are amateurs who keep the fossils that they find.
So what?? Does this affect the main issue in which We are talking about the change in SELLING of FOSSILS from PRIVATE to UNIVERSITY...WRONG IRRELEVANT

(B) Most fossils found in Merina are common types that have little scientific interest.
So what?? there will be other fossils that will be of interest to researcher.
This doesn't take account of the fact of the remaining important FOSSILS that if sold to Univ instead of Private firms can be of help for researchers...IRRELEVANT

(C) Commercial fossil hunters in Merina currently sell some of the fossils they find to universities and museums.
Already given in passage that In Merina commercial fossil hunters often sell important fossils they have found, not to universities or museums, but to individual collectors
this means they are still selling a few...Doesnot address the MAIN ISSUE

(D) Many universities in Merina do not engage in fossil research.

So what?? Does this says anything that the present researchers will/ will not get access to all new fossils
We do not need to increase the number of researchers. We already know there are researchers who want to study fossils. But availability of fossil is an issue.
Does not address the main issue...IRRELEVANT


(E) Most fossils are found by commercial fossil hunters, and they would give up looking for fossils if they were no longer allowed to sell to individual collectors.

Now here is the deal. This directly address the main issue...IF THE FOSSIL HUNTER will stop hunting for FOSSIL, this Law wont help my researcher friend to study any new fossil and so the law will be a BIG LOSS...CORRECT.
Notice THIS is an OUT of SCOPE answer that directly deals with MAIN ISSUE..we need such kind of options

Hope this helps
Regards
Shoum

hi! Was hoping you could help me with this question - I am not able to understand the conclusion here (same issue as the earlier one - the virus question)
https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-merina-co ... 41365.html

In Merina commercial fossil hunters often sell important fossils they have found, not to universities or museums, but to individual collectors, who pay much better but generally do not allow researchers access to their collections. To increase the number of fossils available for research, some legislators propose requiring all fossils that are found in Merina to be sold only to universities or museums.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that the legislators' proposal will fail to achieve its goal?

(A) Some fossil hunters in Merina are not commercial fossil hunters, but rather are amateurs who keep the fossils that they find.

(B) Most fossils found in Merina are common types that have little scientific interest.

(C) Commercial fossil hunters in Merina currently sell some of the fossils they find to universities and museums.

(D) Many universities in Merina do not engage in fossil research.

(E) Most fossils are found by commercial fossil hunters, and they would give up looking for fossils if they were no longer allowed to sell to individual collector

My question is - E talks about the fossils not being found out; given there is no incentive. But isn't the conclusion speaking of making available more fossils to unis/researchers? How is E closer than B? After all B says - many unis do not even have fossil research --> hence, increasing the number of fossils available would not do anything for the researchers either way.
Thank you!

Hi Madhavi 1990.

Here is how I would boil the passage down:

Proposal: In order to get X, people need to do Y.

Option E shows that it is unlikely to do Y. Then people would NOT get X. So, the proposal would break down.

Your reasoning with option B is irrelevant to the task at hand.Its kind like, "if people get X, here is whats gonna happen afterward". As long as we prove that the proposal is gonna break down, we do NOT care whats gonna happen afterward.

Just my 2 cents

Hope this helps

PREMISE: Fossils often sold to individual collectors
PREMISE: Collectors typically do not give researchers access to fossils
CONCLUSION: Forcing fossil Hunters to sell fossils only to universities or museums will increase fossils available for research
SHORTENED CONCLUSION: Proposed law will increase the number fossils available for research

Let's check the answer choices while reminding ourselves of the conclusion...

A) Does this weaken the conclusion that the proposed law will increase the number fossils available for research?
NO. This premise has no bearing on the conclusion.

B) Does this weaken the conclusion that the proposed law will increase the number fossils available for research?
NO. Just because most fossils are uninteresting doesn't mean that interesting fossils are not found.

C) Does this weaken the conclusion that the proposed law will increase the number fossils available for research?
NO. The word "some" tells us that at least one fossil is sold to universities and museums. If there were a law that required ALL fossils to be sold to University's museums then the number of fossils available for research would definitely increase.

D) Does this weaken the conclusion that the proposed law will increase the number fossils available for research?
NO. The conclusion is all about the availability of fossils available for research, not weather every University studies fossils

E) Does this weaken the conclusion that the proposed law will increase the number fossils available for research?
YES! If the fossil hunters stop looking for fossils of then the availability of fossils will NOT increase

Answer: E

Commercial fossil hunters are the key people who do the fossil hunting in Merina.
Legislators want to increase the number of fossils to be available for research.
Conclusion/Proposal in this particular case: Hence they want all fossils that are found in Merina to be sold ONLY to universities or museums.



Strengthen the contention that the proposal is bound to fail.


Who are those hunters isn't a matter of discussion as per the question. Whomsoever he/she is, legislators want him/her to sell the fossils only to the universities or museum.


Even then the legislators want the fossils to be sold only to universities or museums.


Legislators want ALLLLLLLLLLLLL.


Great, Many = More than 1. Even if there are only 2 universities who engage in research of this particular type. The legislators order stands as is.


If the fossil hunters who find most of the commercial fossils stop looking for them in case restrictions are imposed on selling the fossils to individual collectors, then the legislators would never meet their intended result.
Hence this option stands out.

In Mernia commercial fossil hunters often sell important fossils they have found, not to universities or museums, but to individual collectors, who pay much better but generally do not allow researchers access to their collections. To increase the number of fossils available for research, some legislators propose requiring all fossils that are found in Merina to be sold only to universities or museums.

The legislator’s argument is that: requiring that fossils be sold to universities or museums will increase the number of fossils for research.

The legislators reach this conclusion by providing evidence:

[*] “Commercial fossil hunters … sell … fossils they have found … to individual collectors….” instead of universities because collectors pay more. This suggests that fossil hunters are financially incentivised.
[*] The collectors also “generally do not allow researchers access.” The legislators use this premise to conclude that if we exclude collectors from the picture, all will be well.

The legislators believe that if we limit who hunters can sell to, there will be better access for researchers. But is that necessarily true?

Anticipated Answer: Fossil hunters won’t just retaliate and give up looking for fossils. Why bother if I’m not getting paid for it? This leaves us with (E).


_________________

(A) Some fossil hunters in Mernia are not commercial fossil hunters, but rather are amateurs who keep the fossils that they find. - does not explain why the number of fossils available for research may decrease

(B) Most fossils found in Mernia are common types that have little scientific interest. - does not explain why the number of fossils available for research may decrease

(C) Commercial fossil hunters in Mernia currently sell some of the fossils they find to universities and museums. - does not explain why the number of fossils available for research may decrease


(D) Many universities in Mernia do not engage in fossil research. - the passage never really focused on the ''number of universities'' that conducts the research. It could be possible that only a handful of universities actually conducts the research and the conclusion be based on these universities; (D) does not explain why the ''number of fossils'' available for research may decrease.

(E) Most fossils are found by commercial fossil hunters, and they would give up looking for fossils if they were no longer allowed to sell to individual collectors. - (E) implies that if the new plan is enacted, then those who do the manual work to find these fossils will stop their work, since they no longer have any incentive to do so. If they do stop their work, then the ''number of fossils'' that become available for research will certainly decrease. Hence, (E) is the right answer choice.

Conclusion: some legislators propose requiring all fossils that are found in Merina to be sold only to universities or museums (to increase the number of fossils available for research).

Which of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that the legislators' proposal will fail to achieve its goal?

A. Some fossil hunters in Mernia are not commercial fossil hunters, but rather are amateurs who keep the fossils that they find.
Would this increase the number of fossils available for research? No.

B. Most fossils found in Mernia are common types that have little scientific interest.
The whole point is to increase the number of fossils available for research, whether or not it has scientific interest is irrelevant.

C. Commercial fossil hunters in Mernia currently sell some of the fossils they find to universities and museums.
This doesn’t affect the proposal at all. It’s like completely neutral. We want to propose some law that’ll sell these fossils to universities and museums for research (some time down the road). Doesn’t matter what they’re doing right now.

D. Many universities in Mernia do not engage in fossil research.
Can still increase the museum piece.

E. Most fossils are found by commercial fossil hunters, and they would give up looking for fossils if they were no longer allowed to sell to individual collectors.
This highlights a lack of incentive now. So if they can’t sell to individual collectors, there wouldn’t be any fossils found. So this would bring you right back where you started. No/minimal fossils to be researched (1) people who have them won’t let research be done on them OR (2) no/few fossils are found to actually do the research.

Commercial fossil hunters often sell fossil fuels to individual collectors ->
Collectors pay better, but don't provide access to their collection -> That is, say, if the university wants to conduct research on fossil fuels, then individual collectors would not provide access to their collection of fossil even to the university -> If now the rule is that all fossils be sold to universities -> Our job is to point out why is this plan flawed or where would the plan faulter to achieve its objective?

(A) Some fossil hunters in Mernia are not commercial fossil hunters, but rather are amateurs who keep the fossils that they find. - The goal is to "increase" the no.of fossils available for research. The goal can still be accomplished if the group of fossil hunters other the amateurs sell the fossils to the university/museums - Reject

(B) Most fossils found in Mernia are common types that have little scientific interest - Maybe the fossils have historical significance and the museums might require it for the purpose of historical interest. Even if there is little scientific interest,increasing the fossils available for research would still be helpful. This option doesn't point to the success/failure of plan that legislators proposed- Reject

(C) Commercial fossil hunters in Mernia currently sell some of the fossils they find to universities and museums - The goal is to increase the number. Even if some fossils are sold to universities, whether selling all the fossils that fossil hunters find in the future to the universities/museum is a flawed plan or not is the question. Reject

(D) Many universities in Mernia do not engage in fossil research. - That is not a good enough reason for not selling the fossils to the museums or universities that do conduct research. Reject

(E) Most fossils are found by commercial fossil hunters, and they would give up looking for fossils if they were no longer allowed to sell to individual collectors. - This points to a direct failure of the plan. The plan wouldn't help increase the number of fossils available for research if the hunters stop looking for fossils in the first place. Bingo


Posted from my mobile device

Commercial fossil hunters search for fossils for better financial benefits. If the hunters are not allowed to sell to the fossils to individual collectors then will not do the job. A better option could be universities and museums will buy more and pay more.

Ans. E.

In Mernia commercial fossil hunters often sell important fossils they have found, not to universities or museums, but to individual collectors, who pay much better but generally do not allow researchers access to their collections. To increase the number of fossils available for research, some legislators propose requiring all fossils that are found in Merina to be sold only to universities or museums.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that the legislators' proposal will fail to achieve its goal?


(A) Some fossil hunters in Mernia are not commercial fossil hunters, but rather are amateurs who keep the fossils that they find.

Tempting trap choice. The key here is ‘at the time of selling’, the seller cannot sell to anyone else, but the universities!

(B) Most fossils found in Mernia are common types that have little scientific interest.

OK. What counts is that the ones with A LOT of scientific interest are sold to universities. This choice does not wreck that plan.

(C) Commercial fossil hunters in Mernia currently sell some of the fossils they find to universities and museums.

Strengthener alert!

(D) Many universities in Mernia do not engage in fossil research.

This is neither here nor there. The point is that there are universities/researchers that do, do this type of research. The legislation would surely help those researchers!

(E) Most fossils are found by commercial fossil hunters, and they would give up looking for fossils if they were no longer allowed to sell to individual collectors.

Correct. Now we have an even bigger problem…no fossils!
_________________

I am not convinced by the explanation for option A.
The word some means at least 1, so it quite possible that a lot of the hunters are amateurs and keep fossils with them and we would think this way it does weaken the conclusion. However, conclusion mentions "to be sold only to universities or museums". which suggests IF fossils are sold then they should only be sold to the institutions and in this way option A does not impact the conclusion. In other words if a hunter keeps fossils with itself and does not sell them then it isn't an issue according to the conclusion.

Please correct if I made an error in understanding.

Great point - I was looking for a better reason and had to scroll down to find this.

Also, it mentions ALL in the conclusion, which is To increase the number of fossils available for research, some legislators propose requiring ALLfossils that are found in Merina to be sold only to universities or museums
And, option (A) states that some amateurs keep the fossils that they find.
So, doesn't this a weakener?

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________