It is currently 28 Jun 2017, 05:59

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

Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 872
Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School
Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2007, 10:56
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

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

HideShow timer Statistics

Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical fertilizers and pesticide in farming is harmful to local wildlife. To produce the same amount of food, however, more land must be under cultivation when organic farming techniques are used than when chemicals are used. Therefore, organic farming leaves less land available as habitat for local wildlife.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the author’s argument depends?

(A) Chemical fertilizers and pesticides pose no health threat to wildlife.
(B) Wildlife living near farms where chemicals are used will not ingest any food or water containing those chemicals.
(C) The only disadvantage to using chemicals in farming is their potential effect on wildlife.
(D) The same crops are grown on organic farms as on farms where chemicals are used.
(E) Land cultivated by organic farming methods no longer constitutes a habitat for wildlife.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 912
Re: CR; Crops [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2007, 12:56
Fistail wrote:
Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical fertilizers and pesticide in farming is harmful to local wildlife. To produce the same amount of food, however, more land must be under cultivation when organic farming techniques are used than when chemicals are used. Therefore, organic farming leaves less land available as habitat for local wildlife.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the author’s argument depends?

(A) Chemical fertilizers and pesticides pose no health threat to wildlife.
(B) Wildlife living near farms where chemicals are used will not ingest any food or water containing those chemicals.
(C) The only disadvantage to using chemicals in farming is their potential effect on wildlife.
(D) The same crops are grown on organic farms as on farms where chemicals are used.
(E) Land cultivated by organic farming methods no longer constitutes a habitat for wildlife.


The author is saying that by not using pesticides, organic farming is meant to protect wildlife but still essentially taking away a bigger chunk of their home by using more land.
I would say the answer is E although I was tempted by C.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 856
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2007, 19:40
Straight E...The conclusion is about organic farming leaving less land free...so E is irrelevant.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 872
Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School
Re: CR; Crops [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Aug 2007, 18:40
Fistail wrote:
Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical fertilizers and pesticide in farming is harmful to local wildlife. To produce the same amount of food, however, more land must be under cultivation when organic farming techniques are used than when chemicals are used. Therefore, organic farming leaves less land available as habitat for local wildlife.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the author’s argument depends?

(A) Chemical fertilizers and pesticides pose no health threat to wildlife.
(B) Wildlife living near farms where chemicals are used will not ingest any food or water containing those chemicals.
(C) The only disadvantage to using chemicals in farming is their potential effect on wildlife.
(D) The same crops are grown on organic farms as on farms where chemicals are used.
(E) Land cultivated by organic farming methods no longer constitutes a habitat for wildlife.


Thanks for your responses.

OA is E.
Re: CR; Crops   [#permalink] 05 Aug 2007, 18:40
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Exposure to certain chemicals commonly used in elementary reply2spg 0 06 Nov 2013, 11:44
Exposure to certain chemicals commonly used in elementary Nihit 13 05 Nov 2008, 13:50
Wind farms, which generate electricity using arrays of marcodonzelli 4 20 Jan 2008, 11:52
1 Exposure to certain chemicals commonly used in elementary ttram 9 11 Oct 2007, 19:55
Organization president: The stationery and envelopes used in eyunni 3 09 Oct 2007, 10:18
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical

  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 and phpBB SEO

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®.