Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
11 Oct 2021, 02:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
25%
(medium)
Question Stats:
81% (01:46) correct
19%
(01:54)
wrong
based on 144
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Several major earthquakes have occurred in a certain region over the last ten years. But a new earthquake prediction method promises to aid local civil defense officials in deciding exactly when to evacuate various towns. Detected before each of these major quakes were certain changes in the electric current in the earth’s crust.
Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?
(A) Scientists do not fully understand what brought about the changes in the electric current in the earth’s crust that preceded each of the major quakes in the region over the last ten years.
(B) Most other earthquake prediction methods have been based on a weaker correlation than that found between the changes in the electric current in the earth’s crust and the subsequent earthquakes.
(C) The frequency of major earthquakes in the region has increased over the last ten years.
(D) There is considerable variation in the length of time between the changes in the electric current and the subsequent earthquakes.
(E) There is presently only one station in the region that is capable of detecting the electric current in the earth’s crust.
Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?
(A) Scientists do not fully understand what brought about the changes in the electric current in the earth’s crust that preceded each of the major quakes in the region over the last ten years.
(B) Most other earthquake prediction methods have been based on a weaker correlation than that found between the changes in the electric current in the earth’s crust and the subsequent earthquakes.
(C) The frequency of major earthquakes in the region has increased over the last ten years.
(D) There is considerable variation in the length of time between the changes in the electric current and the subsequent earthquakes.
(E) There is presently only one station in the region that is capable of detecting the electric current in the earth’s crust.
16 Oct 2021, 02:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT
The conclusion of the argument seems to be, “A new earthquake prediction method promises to aid local civil defense officials in deciding exactly when to evacuate.” The evidence for this conclusion is that “certain changes in the electric current of the earth’s crust” preceded each of several recent earthquakes.
This isn’t unreasonable per se, but it does have a pretty big gap in it. How accurately can we detect these changes in the electric current? Will we miss a bunch of earthquakes? Or perhaps even worse, will we have false positives all the time, and be evacuating for no reason every other day?
We’re asked to weaken the argument, and I’m hoping we’ll find one of our questions above in the answer choices.
A) I don’t think scientists need to fully understand something in order for them to take advantage of it. For example, scientists for a very long time had no idea what caused gravity. But they were still able to make all manner of inventions and discoveries that accounted for, and used, gravity. I doubt this is it.
B) It seems like this would strengthen the argument, rather than weaken it.
C) This is totally irrelevant to whether or not the earthquake detection system is going to work.
D) This could be it. If there is considerable variation in the length of time between the electrical changes and the actual earthquake, how will we know exactly when to evacuate? If we evacuated two years too early, would it really be worth it? I don’t think so. And if we evacuated two hours too late, we’d be buried under rubble. This looks pretty good.
E) Who cares? One station might be totally sufficient to do all the detection that is required for the entire region (or world, or universe.)
Our answer is D.
Moderators:
189 posts
