It is currently 22 Feb 2018, 20:38

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Science Academy study: It has been demonstrated that with

Author Message
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1877
Schools: CBS, Kellogg

### Show Tags

24 May 2009, 06:00
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (00:53) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 3 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Science Academy study: It has been demonstrated that with natural methods, some well-managed farms are able to reduce the amounts of synthetic fertilizer and pesticide and also of antibiotics they use without necessarily decreasing yields; in some cases yields can be increased.
Critics: Not so. The farms the academy selected to study were the ones that seemed most likely to be successful in using natural methods. What about the farmers who have tried such methods and failed?
Which one of the following is the most adequate evaluation of the logical force of the critics’ response?
(A) Success and failure in farming are rarely due only to luck, because farming is the management of chance occurrences.
(B) The critics show that the result of the study would have been different if twice as many farms had been studied.
(C) The critics assume without justification that the failures were not due to soil quality.
(D) The critics demonstrate that natural methods are not suitable for the majority of framers.
(E) The issue is only to show that something is possible, so it is not relevant whether the instances studied were representative.
_________________
Manager
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 113

### Show Tags

24 May 2009, 06:55
E it is

sampling error
Manager
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 248

### Show Tags

24 May 2009, 07:16
IMO E

Science Academy study: It has been demonstrated that with natural methods, some well-managed farms are able to reduce the amounts of synthetic fertilizer and pesticide and also of antibiotics they use without necessarily decreasing yields; in some cases yields can be increased.
Critics: Not so. The farms the academy selected to study were the ones that seemed most likely to be successful in using natural methods. What about the farmers who have tried such methods and failed?
Which one of the following is the most adequate evaluation of the logical force of the critics’ response?
(A) Success and failure in farming are rarely due only to luck, because farming is the management of chance occurrencs -->not mentioned
(B) The critics show that the result of the study would have been different if twice as many farms had been studied -->not mentioned
(C) The critics assume without justification that the failures were not due to soil quality --> not mentioned
(D) The critics demonstrate that natural methods are not suitable for the majority of framers -->not mentioned
(E) The issue is only to show that something is possible, so it is not relevant whether the instances studied were representative --> best: something possible happens with successful farms with natural methods, but he fails to show impossible successful farms with such methods. So, totally, this study can't prove to be representative of the whole
Manager
Joined: 15 May 2009
Posts: 168

### Show Tags

25 May 2009, 11:16
sondenso wrote:
Science Academy study: It has been demonstrated that with natural methods, some well-managed farms are able to reduce the amounts of synthetic fertilizer and pesticide and also of antibiotics they use without necessarily decreasing yields; in some cases yields can be increased.
Critics: Not so. The farms the academy selected to study were the ones that seemed most likely to be successful in using natural methods. What about the farmers who have tried such methods and failed?
Which one of the following is the most adequate evaluation of the logical force of the critics’ response?

(A) Success and failure in farming are rarely due only to luck, because farming is the management of chance occurrences.
(B) The critics show that the result of the study would have been different if twice as many farms had been studied.
(C) The critics assume without justification that the failures were not due to soil quality.
(D) The critics demonstrate that natural methods are not suitable for the majority of farmers.
(E) The issue is only to show that something is possible, so it is not relevant whether the instances studied were representative.

A - Kind of confusing... I'm not too drawn by this one.
B - Yeah... warming up a little, let's see if something else does a better job.
C - Same feeling as A... not too accurate
E - This sounds more like a response by the science academy, rather than an evaluation of the critic's argument.

D - This seems like the best descriptor of the critic's argument. They said only a few suitable farms were studied, while implying many have failed. I wouldn't go so far as to conclude that the MAJORITY of farms are unsuitable for this practice, but it seems like the best answer of the lot.
Manager
Joined: 15 May 2009
Posts: 168

### Show Tags

25 May 2009, 11:17
Now that I've reread the question & the replies, I agree with E.
Manager
Joined: 24 May 2009
Posts: 102

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2009, 04:22
I'd go with E too
Director
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 805
WE 1: 7years (Financial Services - Consultant, BA)

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2009, 07:38
E for me too (1:51)
_________________

Consider kudos for the good post ...
My debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/journey-670-to-720-q50-v36-long-85083.html

Re: Farming   [#permalink] 08 Jun 2009, 07:38
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Science Academy study: It has been demonstrated that with

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 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®.