Last visit was: 20 Nov 2025, 00:14 It is currently 20 Nov 2025, 00:14
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
harshi
User avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Last visit: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 24
Own Kudos:
80
Posts: 24
Kudos: 80
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 11 Mar 2005, 15:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
N
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

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

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste poses no threat to people living nearby. If this claim could be made with certainty, there would be no reason for not locating sites in areas of dense population. But the policy of dumping nuclear waste only in the more sparsely populated regions indicates, at the very least, some misgiving about safety on the part of those responsible for policy.

Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument?
(A) Evaluation plans in the event of an accident could not be guaranteed to work perfectly except where the population is small.
(B) In the event of an accident, it is certain that fewer people would be harmed in a sparsely populated than in s densely populated area.
(C) Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.
(D) There are dangers associated with chemical waste, and it, too, is dumped away from areas of dense population.
(E) Until there is no shred of doubt that nuclear dumps are safe, it makes sense to situate them where they pose the least threat to the public.



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
User avatar
kevinw
User avatar
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Last visit: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 56
Own Kudos:
1
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 56
Kudos: 1
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 11 Mar 2005, 16:23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I will go for B..

because it is the only one atacking the main assumption: stating that sites are not dangerous for population.
User avatar
DLMD
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2004
Last visit: 07 Oct 2005
Posts: 215
Own Kudos:
904
Posts: 215
Kudos: 904
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 11 Mar 2005, 16:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
go with B, since the passage assumes "population in a certain area is a key to evaluate the danger of nuclear threat".
User avatar
prep_gmat
User avatar
Joined: 13 Oct 2004
Last visit: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 113
Own Kudos:
37
Posts: 113
Kudos: 37
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 11 Mar 2005, 19:04
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste poses no threat to people living nearby. If this claim could be made with certainty, there would be no reason for not locating sites in areas of dense population. But the policy of dumping nuclear waste only in the more sparsely populated regions indicates, at the very least, some misgiving about safety on the part of those responsible for policy.

Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument?
(A) Evaluation plans in the event of an accident could not be guaranteed to work perfectly except where the population is small.
-- The event of an accident conveys a semblance of safety concern, cannot weaken the argument.

(B) In the event of an accident, it is certain that fewer people would be harmed in a sparsely populated than in s densely populated area.
-- Same as A.
(C) Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.

-- My pick. Safety is not a concern, economic and bureaucracy are...

(D) There are dangers associated with chemical waste, and it, too, is dumped away from areas of dense population.

-- Out of scope.

(E) Until there is no shred of doubt that nuclear dumps are safe, it makes sense to situate them where they pose the least threat to the public.

-- Unwarranted extension of the argument.
User avatar
chunjuwu
User avatar
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Last visit: 01 Aug 2005
Posts: 541
Own Kudos:
4,819
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 541
Kudos: 4,819
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 11 Mar 2005, 19:47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
harshi
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste poses no threat to people living nearby. If this claim could be made with certainty, there would be no reason for not locating sites in areas of dense population. But the policy of dumping nuclear waste only in the more sparsely populated regions indicates, at the very least, some misgiving about safety on the part of those responsible for policy.

Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument?
(A) Evaluation plans in the event of an accident could not be guaranteed to work perfectly except where the population is small.
(B) In the event of an accident, it is certain that fewer people would be harmed in a sparsely populated than in s densely populated area.
(C) Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.
(D) There are dangers associated with chemical waste, and it, too, is dumped away from areas of dense population.
(E) Until there is no shred of doubt that nuclear dumps are safe, it makes sense to situate them where they pose the least threat to the public.
Show more


We must accord with the argument's content and weaken the conclusion at the same time.

That is, nuclear wates are located in areas of sparse population. That is not the safety matter but others.

C give us the explanation.
i.e. the area consideration are economic and bureaucratic matters rather than safety matters.

other choices still talked about safety; so, couldn't be right answer
avatar
HongHu
avatar
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Last visit: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 966
Own Kudos:
796
Posts: 966
Kudos: 796
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 13 Mar 2005, 01:05
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Claim: If nuclear waste is not dangerous that there's no reason not locating site in dense populated areas.
Fact: There's a policy that the nuclear waste site should not be in the dense populated areas.
Conclusion: Nuclear waste must be dangerous.

Logic error: Who says that the potential danger is the only reason why nuclear waste site should not located in dense populated areas?

Ask for weakening.

(A) Evaluation plans in the event of an accident could not be guaranteed to work perfectly except where the population is small.
It's dangerous. Strengthen.

(B) In the event of an accident, it is certain that fewer people would be harmed in a sparsely populated than in s densely populated area.
Strengthen.

(C) Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.
Provide other reasons. Weaken.

(D) There are dangers associated with chemical waste, and it, too, is dumped away from areas of dense population.
Danger. Strengthen.

(E) Until there is no shred of doubt that nuclear dumps are safe, it makes sense to situate them where they pose the least threat to the public.
Might be dangerous. Strengthen.

(C)
User avatar
ywilfred
User avatar
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Last visit: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 1,989
Own Kudos:
2,031
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,989
Kudos: 2,031
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 13 Mar 2005, 09:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(A) Evaluation plans in the event of an accident could not be guaranteed to work perfectly except where the population is small.
- I think you meant 'evacuation plans' here. This strengthens the conclusion that nuclear waste poses a threat, and thus the need for an evacuation plan.

(B) In the event of an accident, it is certain that fewer people would be harmed in a sparsely populated than in s densely populated area.
- If it's safe, what accident is there to mention of.

(C) Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.
- This one will explains why dumping takes place in sparesly populated regions, and it's not due to any danger, but rather due to economic and political reasons.

(D) There are dangers associated with chemical waste, and it, too, is dumped away from areas of dense population.
- strengthen the claim

(E) Until there is no shred of doubt that nuclear dumps are safe, it makes sense to situate them where they pose the least threat to the public.
- Strengthens the claim.

C it is.
User avatar
mallelac
User avatar
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Last visit: 11 Sep 2005
Posts: 212
Own Kudos:
15
Location: Bangalore, India
Posts: 212
Kudos: 15
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 13 Mar 2005, 12:21
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Yes.. it is C as it provides another reason for dumping wates near sparsely populated regions.


harshi
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste poses no threat to people living nearby. If this claim could be made with certainty, there would be no reason for not locating sites in areas of dense population. But the policy of dumping nuclear waste only in the more sparsely populated regions indicates, at the very least, some misgiving about safety on the part of those responsible for policy.

Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument?
(A) Evaluation plans in the event of an accident could not be guaranteed to work perfectly except where the population is small.
(B) In the event of an accident, it is certain that fewer people would be harmed in a sparsely populated than in s densely populated area.
(C) Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.
(D) There are dangers associated with chemical waste, and it, too, is dumped away from areas of dense population.
(E) Until there is no shred of doubt that nuclear dumps are safe, it makes sense to situate them where they pose the least threat to the public.
Show more
User avatar
ywilfred
User avatar
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Last visit: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 1,989
Own Kudos:
2,031
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,989
Kudos: 2,031
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 15 Mar 2005, 11:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
B strengthens the premise that nuclear wastes can cause accidents and so should be dumped far away from populated regions. The only way to weaken the conclusion is to find a choice that gives an alternative reason why nuclear wastes are dumped in rural areas.
User avatar
Folaa3
User avatar
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Last visit: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 382
Own Kudos:
128
Posts: 382
Kudos: 128
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 15 Mar 2005, 11:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
first (A) and (B) seems to serve the the same purpose.
Second none of the options seeem to seriously weaken the argument.
finally, i will go with (C)
OA pls and OE
User avatar
ywilfred
User avatar
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Last visit: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 1,989
Own Kudos:
2,031
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,989
Kudos: 2,031
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 15 Mar 2005, 12:04
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
B does serve a purpose if you're to strengthen the conclusion.

I'll stick with my original answer, C. :-D
User avatar
harshi
User avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Last visit: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 24
Own Kudos:
80
Posts: 24
Kudos: 80
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 15 Mar 2005, 13:47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Great way to explain it. OA is C. Thank you.

HongHu
Claim: If nuclear waste is not dangerous that there's no reason not locating site in dense populated areas.
Fact: There's a policy that the nuclear waste site should not be in the dense populated areas.
Conclusion: Nuclear waste must be dangerous.

Logic error: Who says that the potential danger is the only reason why nuclear waste site should not located in dense populated areas?

Ask for weakening.

(A) Evaluation plans in the event of an accident could not be guaranteed to work perfectly except where the population is small.
It's dangerous. Strengthen.

(B) In the event of an accident, it is certain that fewer people would be harmed in a sparsely populated than in s densely populated area.
Strengthen.

(C) Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.
Provide other reasons. Weaken.

(D) There are dangers associated with chemical waste, and it, too, is dumped away from areas of dense population.
Danger. Strengthen.

(E) Until there is no shred of doubt that nuclear dumps are safe, it makes sense to situate them where they pose the least threat to the public.
Might be dangerous. Strengthen.

(C)
Show more
User avatar
Folaa3
User avatar
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Last visit: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 382
Own Kudos:
128
Posts: 382
Kudos: 128
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 15 Mar 2005, 14:20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
You know i guessed and i must confess that i do not understand this question stem. Can someone please do me a favor and explain what is being asked in the question stem? I can't go into the exam guessing. Thanks :cry:
avatar
ARYAN2007
avatar
Joined: 15 Mar 2005
Last visit: 09 May 2005
Posts: 4
Posts: 4
Kudos: 0
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 15 Mar 2005, 15:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The assumption on which the author's argument based is SAFETY. he argues that the policy makers are hiding 'some' safety issues by dumping the nuclear waste in a sparsely populated ares.

This makes easy to find an alternative reason for doing so..

I believe C provides an alternative explanation showing 'economic' criteria
All other options either not related (D) or point to SAFETY in some way.

_Aryan
User avatar
Folaa3
User avatar
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Last visit: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 382
Own Kudos:
128
Posts: 382
Kudos: 128
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste 15 Mar 2005, 16:51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ARYAN2007
The assumption on which the author's argument based is SAFETY. he argues that the policy makers are hiding 'some' safety issues by dumping the nuclear waste in a sparsely populated ares.

This makes easy to find an alternative reason for doing so..

I believe C provides an alternative explanation showing 'economic' criteria
All other options either not related (D) or point to SAFETY in some way.

_Aryan
Show more


Thanks for the explanation Aryan. Got it now



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts