GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 24 Mar 2019, 12:40

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

Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the

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

Hide Tags

 
Manager
Manager
User avatar
P
Joined: 13 Aug 2015
Posts: 207
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.82
WE: Corporate Finance (Retail Banking)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 12 Mar 2019, 23:14
1
1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  35% (medium)

Question Stats:

69% (01:30) correct 31% (01:31) wrong based on 155 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the concentration of phosphorus in the local swamp above previous levels, but the claim that the increase in phosphorus is harming the swamp's native aquatic wildlife is false; the phosphorus concentration in the swamp is actually less than that found in certain kinds of bottled water that some people drink every day.

The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the ground that it

(A) makes exaggerations in formulating the claim against which it argues

(B) bases its conclusion on two contradictory claims

(C) relies on evidence the relevance of which has not been established

(D) concedes the very point that it argues against

(E) makes a generalization that is unwarranted because the sources of the data on which it is based have not been specified

_________________

If you like my posts, please give kudos. Help me unlock gmatclub tests.


Originally posted by mkrishnabdrr on 19 Jun 2017, 18:37.
Last edited by Bunuel on 12 Mar 2019, 23:14, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
SVP
SVP
avatar
P
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1546
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Jun 2017, 22:11
1
I do not understand how to get the answer out of this question. Is there any general way to solve this question?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Jun 2017
Posts: 10
Re: Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jun 2017, 02:15
C

The evidence provided is not relevant.

Posted from my mobile device

Posted from my mobile device
VP
VP
User avatar
D
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1024
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jun 2017, 08:19
imo C
easy one the two independent event are unrelated c correctly shows that.
_________________

Please give kudos if you found my answers useful

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Sep 2017
Posts: 22
Re: Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Mar 2019, 23:09
Hi, can someone explain why D is wrong?
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 19 Mar 2018
Posts: 65
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 600 Q42 V31
GPA: 4
WE: Operations (Energy and Utilities)
CAT Tests
Re: Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Mar 2019, 23:58
mkrishnabdrr wrote:
Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the concentration of phosphorus in the local swamp above previous levels, but the claim that the increase in phosphorus is harming the swamp's native aquatic wildlife is false; the phosphorus concentration in the swamp is actually less than that found in certain kinds of bottled water that some people drink every day.

The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the ground that it

(A) makes exaggerations in formulating the claim against which it argues

(B) bases its conclusion on two contradictory claims

(C) relies on evidence the relevance of which has not been established

(D) concedes the very point that it argues against

(E) makes a generalization that is unwarranted because the sources of the data on which it is based have not been specified


Definitely C is the correct answer choice. In the given argument phosphorus content of bottled water is being compared with the phosphorus content of local swamp. The argument does not mention any point of relevance between the Phosphorus content of the bottled water and the swamp. Aquatic life forms are different from human beings. So, the comparison here is inappropriate.
A- irrelevant
B- there are no two contradictory claims in the argument.
C- CORRECT
D- the author simply puts forward his claim and this claim is based upon a comparison between two different things.
E- irrelevant. No generalizations have been made.
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 25 Jun 2017
Posts: 21
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 660 Q45 V36
GPA: 3.5
WE: Human Resources (Consumer Products)
CAT Tests
Re: Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Mar 2019, 14:29
abhishek31 wrote:
Hi, can someone explain why D is wrong?


D is incorrect as the facts in the stimulus are not arguing against the harm of phosphorus levels. It concedes with the claim that the increase in phosphorus is not harming the swamp's native aquatic wildlife. However, the argument does provide irrelevant evidence to support that claim. Specifically, the argument assumes that if phosphorus content is at an acceptable level in bottled water, then less concentration in the swamp, makes it acceptable there too. Thus, this evidence is not relevant to the argument. Answer choice C is correct.
_________________

If you liked my post, give me Kudos! Thanks!

GMAT Club Bot
Re: Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the   [#permalink] 13 Mar 2019, 14:29
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Irrigation runoff from neighboring farms may well have increased the

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


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| 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®.