It is currently 24 Sep 2017, 17:59

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In the years since the city of London imposed strict

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

Hide Tags

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 803

Kudos [?]: 82 [0], given: 0

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Feb 2009, 11:43
A argument does not assume that local industry does most of the polluting

Kudos [?]: 82 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Dec 2008
Posts: 103

Kudos [?]: 223 [0], given: 2

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Feb 2009, 21:51
My answer was between A and E as well. A "entirely' is too extreme where else for E "sighting" not mentioned.

OA: A

Kudos [?]: 223 [0], given: 2

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1262

Kudos [?]: 511 [0], given: 0

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Feb 2009, 21:52
Can we hv the OA pls?

Kudos [?]: 511 [0], given: 0

3 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2009
Posts: 102

Kudos [?]: 42 [3], given: 2

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Feb 2009, 21:58
3
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
What a CR ? Really a tough question.
Specially assumption sometimes are most difficult. When I am in a situation like this ( cannot decide with 100% confirmation ) I opt for negation policy.
Negate the option, if it breaks the argument , it must be an assumption.

joyseychow wrote:
In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.

P1:London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry
P2:Since then,number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically
Conclusion:Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.

(-B) Air-pollution regulations on industry does not have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
We cannot get to the conclusion without this
(-C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically not similar to those once suffered by London.
If author has not assumed this, he cannot mention "other cities" in the conclusion.
(-D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is not desirable.
This is tough. But if the we assume that increase of birds are not desired then making the air clean will also not be desirable. It has to be an assumption.


I am stuck between A and E.
(-A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost not entirely by local industry.
Does this break the argument ? No I think. So what if the pollution
is almost not entirely by local industry, still the regulations could help other cities....
If E can fail the test, A should be the winner.


(-E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London does not reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.
If the increased sightings not equal to increase in the number of species, then how can we conclude to imply the regulations in other cities. The conclusion says "....rules [color=#BF0000]should be imposed ..... [/color]. Author seems to be very confident. So he must be assuming that the count is reflecting an increase !!!!!!




In for A

Kudos [?]: 42 [3], given: 2

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 729

Kudos [?]: 827 [0], given: 99

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Feb 2009, 09:19
OK I agree. 'almost' made A for the candidate. but still why E is wrong? any one can put some light on it?

Thanks.

Kudos [?]: 827 [0], given: 99

3 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 964

Kudos [?]: 287 [3], given: 5

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Feb 2009, 09:44
3
This post received
KUDOS
E is wrong because we assume that the increase of bird species is related to ACTUAL increases in bird, rather than MORE people calling in with "sightings".

Suppose you have 100 birds - but instead of having 10 people calling in, now you have 50 people calling in.

Does that mean that there are more birds? nope. We still have 100. It just means that there are more people reporting them.

joyseychow wrote:
In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.

Kudos [?]: 287 [3], given: 5

Expert Post
4 KUDOS received
GMAT Tutor
avatar
B
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1341

Kudos [?]: 1911 [4], given: 6

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Feb 2009, 09:46
4
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The answer must be A here - we know that pollution regulations on local industry in London have helped increase the number of birds. Presumably local industry then produces a significant amount of pollution, so the regulations may have helped to reduce pollution overall. Still, local industry does not need to be 'entirely' responsible for the pollution in order for regulations to help matters. Perhaps local industry only created 25% of the total pollution, but the regulations cut local industry pollution to zero; that would still have a significant impact on air quality.

If you bring outside opinions to the argument, E might be tempting - if you think reducing air pollution is good in and of itself, then E might not seem relevant. Still, if we analyze the argument -- Regulations in London led to more birds. Therefore these regulations are good and should be adopted by other cities. -- we see that the *only* reason the author gives for introducing regulations is to increase the number of birds - surely the author is assuming that's a good thing if he or she is proposing other cities introduce the same regulations.
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

Kudos [?]: 1911 [4], given: 6

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 729

Kudos [?]: 827 [0], given: 99

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Feb 2009, 10:56
Thanks bigfernhead and IanStewart for your explanations.

Kudos [?]: 827 [0], given: 99

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 27 May 2009
Posts: 42

Kudos [?]: 233 [0], given: 3

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 May 2009, 21:04
In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.

Kudos [?]: 233 [0], given: 3

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 30 May 2009
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 May 2009, 21:21
IMO E...

E - doesn't matter that birds stay in the london or come for picnic.. but birds do come to London because of clean air..

E is not an assumption in this argument.. Rest all are..

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Dec 2008
Posts: 103

Kudos [?]: 223 [0], given: 2

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jun 2009, 07:08
ritjn2003 wrote:
In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.



Answer is A.
Refer cr1000-t2-q2-75447.html

Kudos [?]: 223 [0], given: 2

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jun 2009
Posts: 784

Kudos [?]: 884 [0], given: 56

Location: New Delhi
WE 1: 5.5 yrs in IT
Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jun 2009, 08:20
joyseychow wrote:
Answer is A.
Refer cr1000-t2-q2-75447.html


After reading this explanation, i'm convinced that it should be 'A'
_________________

ISB 2011-12 thread | Ask ISB Alumni @ ThinkISB
All information related to Indian candidates and B-schools | Indian B-schools accepting GMAT scores
Self evaluation for Why MBA?

Kudos [?]: 884 [0], given: 56

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 03 Nov 2005
Posts: 380

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 17

Location: Chicago, IL
Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Mar 2010, 22:26
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.
_________________

Hard work is the main determinant of success

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 17

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 18 Feb 2010
Posts: 171

Kudos [?]: 232 [0], given: 0

Schools: ISB
Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Mar 2010, 23:48
rlevochkin wrote:
In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.

Not a necessary assumption. Seems to be the answer !!!
_________________

CONSIDER AWARDING KUDOS IF MY POST HELPS !!!

Kudos [?]: 232 [0], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Posts: 17

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2010, 06:14
IMO D.
what's OA?

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1480

Kudos [?]: 733 [0], given: 6

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2010, 11:44
I would pick (A) because it is too extreme...."air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry"

The premise says that similar air pollution rules should be imposed in other cities and not exactly same air pollution rules should be imposed. That means....air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry....is not the assumption.

Kudos [?]: 733 [0], given: 6

Retired Moderator
avatar
Status: Darden Class of 2013
Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Posts: 1834

Kudos [?]: 391 [0], given: 37

Schools: University of Virginia
Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2010, 13:30
interesting question. I went with (E). OA?
_________________

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 391 [0], given: 37

Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 14 Mar 2010
Posts: 49

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2010, 14:35
Should be A. The other answers are all assumptions used, in part, to come to the conclusion that regulation should be enforced elsewhere.

Only A goes in another direction.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Feb 2010
Posts: 107

Kudos [?]: 427 [0], given: 14

Location: Denver
Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Mar 2010, 05:48
my choice is D. any thoughts?

Kudos [?]: 427 [0], given: 14

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 237

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 20

Location: Ukraine
Schools: Ross 2013
WE 1: Pharmaceutical industry 5 years, C level
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Mar 2010, 06:50
It is A because it is not clearly stated in the passage that the local industry causes the majority environmental problems.

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 20

Re: In the years since the city of London imposed strict   [#permalink] 20 Mar 2010, 06:50

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6    Next  [ 120 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In the years since the city of London imposed strict

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


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.