It is currently 20 Nov 2017, 12:29

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

It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste

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

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 01 Sep 2009
Posts: 62

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 3

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Sep 2009, 11:04
C IMO.
amolsk11 wrote:
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.
--> This strengthens the argument which says that there is some misgiving about safety. That is why "accident" cound not be guranteed.
(B) In the event of an accident, it is certain that fewer people would be harmed in a sparsely populated than in a densely populated area.
--> "In the event of accident" implies that there are chances of accident which strengthens the argument.
(C) Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.
--> This clearly tells why it is dumped in sparsely populated area. The reason as per this statement is economic and bureaucratic problems and not any safety issue. So this weakens the argument.
(D) There are dangers associated with chemical waste, and it, too, is dumped away from areas of dense population.
--> "Dangers associated with chemical wastes" strengthens the argument.
(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.
--> Doubt for safety strengthens the argument.

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 3

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 23 Jun 2009
Posts: 145

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 9

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Sep 2009, 14:41
IMO "A"

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 9

2 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 354

Kudos [?]: 239 [2], given: 16

Concentration: Technology, Marketing
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3
WE: Sales (Telecommunications)
Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Sep 2009, 13:24
2
This post received
KUDOS
Situation : It is claimed that the nuclear waste poses no threat to people living nearby and hence nuclear waste dumping could be located near sites in areas of dense population.
But there is a policy in place which requires dumping nuclear waste only in the more sparsely populated regions.

Argument : From the policy for dumping nuclear waste it is clear that there is some misgiving about safety on the part of those responsible for policy.

Assumption : there is no factor other than safety which governs the policies made for the dumping of nuclear wasts.

(C) catches this miss and provides an alternative explanation for the policy ...
Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.

IMO C
OA C
_________________

Lahoosaher

Kudos [?]: 239 [2], given: 16

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 131

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 50

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Sep 2009, 08:01
ill choose c

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 50

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Nov 2005
Posts: 180

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 10

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Sep 2009, 11:48
IMO C

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 10

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Posts: 308

Kudos [?]: 464 [0], given: 1

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Feb 2010, 12:17
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
16. 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 a 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.


OA is
[Reveal] Spoiler:
c

Kudos [?]: 464 [0], given: 1

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 19

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 7

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Feb 2010, 16:14
C

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 7

2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 196

Kudos [?]: 111 [2], given: 12

Concentration: General Management, Sustainability
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Feb 2010, 16:28
2
This post received
KUDOS
(A) Evaluation plans in the event of an accident could not be guaranteed to work perfectly except where the population is small.
>> Strengthens the argument. This belives there is still a chance of it being dangerous.
(B) In the event of an accident, it is certain that fewer people would be harmed in a sparsely populated than in a densely populated area.
>> Strengthens the argument. Same reason as above.
(C) Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.
>> Weakens the argument. Because, this shows it is only because of economic and bureaucratic problems and not because of threat to living near by.
(D) There are dangers associated with chemical waste, and it, too, is dumped away from areas of dense population.
>> Strengthens the argument. Same reason as point1.
(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 argument. It shows there is still a doubt that the nuclear dump is not safe.

My Answer is C.

Kudos [?]: 111 [2], given: 12

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
Posts: 187

Kudos [?]: 150 [0], given: 6

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Feb 2010, 21:21

Kudos [?]: 150 [0], given: 6

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 162

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 5

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Mar 2010, 22:14
vaivish1723 wrote:
16. 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 a 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.


OA is
[Reveal] Spoiler:
c



only choice C speaks about reasons other than health so it is the correct answer choice

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 5

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 02 Apr 2010
Posts: 46

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

Location: Mumbai
Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Oct 2010, 10:54
Although I didn't understand the argument part completely, by the process of elimination I selected C. Could someone please tell what does the last line of the argument mean?
_________________

Consider kudos for good explanations.

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

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 327

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 0

Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering
Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Oct 2010, 11:14
mbasaikiran wrote:
Although I didn't understand the argument part completely, by the process of elimination I selected C. Could someone please tell what does the last line of the argument mean?


Quote:
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.


The first part says - Dumping nuclear waste has no threat / harmful effects on the people who reside in the nearby areas. Therefore, why no dump nuclear waste in areas of dense population e.g. middle of the city.

Second part says - HOWEVER, because there is a policy that waste can only be dumped in sparsely populated regions shows that the people who have come up with the policy are themselves not sure about the fact that the waste dumping has no detrimental effects on the nearby population. If these policy makers really believed what they said about no harmful effects, then we should be allowed to dump the waste anywhere.
_________________

All things are possible to those who believe.

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 0

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 621

Kudos [?]: 282 [0], given: 51

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 May 2011, 12:59
C is straight forward here.took 1:24 min
_________________

What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.

Kudos [?]: 282 [0], given: 51

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: One last try =,=
Joined: 11 Jun 2010
Posts: 139

Kudos [?]: 113 [0], given: 32

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jun 2011, 03:36
I am confused about the conclusion of this CR problem.
The conclusion is: "there would be no reason for not locating sites in areas of dense population", isn't it? If so, choice C can be the correct answer.
_________________

There can be Miracles when you believe

Kudos [?]: 113 [0], given: 32

VP
VP
avatar
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1283

Kudos [?]: 286 [0], given: 10

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jun 2011, 03:42
C gives an alternate reason for dumping the N-waste. hence an OA.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Kudos [?]: 286 [0], given: 10

Director
Director
avatar
Status: Prep started for the n-th time
Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Posts: 672

Kudos [?]: 198 [0], given: 37

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jun 2011, 19:15
C for me as well.

Crick

Kudos [?]: 198 [0], given: 37

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 14 Apr 2011
Posts: 193

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 19

Reviews Badge
Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jul 2011, 05:53
C .. alternative explanation for the action
_________________

Looking for Kudos :)

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 19

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 247

Kudos [?]: 238 [0], given: 20

Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Mar 2012, 05:41
acer2knight wrote:
my first answer was E.

OA please

Initially I also thought it should be E. Now I realize my mistake and understand it should be C.

In the argument, it is very clearly stated that "...If this claim could be made with certainty...". This means, the author is accepting the conclusion would be true if and only if the claim can be made with certainty. So, there is no point in weakening the argument on this basis.

E is really a trap and the correct answer is C.
_________________

-------------------------
-Aravind Chembeti

Kudos [?]: 238 [0], given: 20

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 351

Kudos [?]: 205 [0], given: 31

Concentration: Operations, Strategy
Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Mar 2012, 02:08
C straight. nice question though
_________________

Practice Practice and practice...!!

If my reply /analysis is helpful-->please press KUDOS
If there's a loophole in my analysis--> suggest measures to make it airtight.

Kudos [?]: 205 [0], given: 31

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Apr 2011
Posts: 177

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 6

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Mar 2012, 01:58
C :- As it gives advanatge which works against given logic

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 6

Re: It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste   [#permalink] 20 Mar 2012, 01:58

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 54 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste

  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®.