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.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
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
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
05 Oct 2017, 00:33
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
84% (01:44) correct
16%
(01:59)
wrong
based on 1097
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Slash-and-burn agriculture involves burning several acres of forest, leaving vegetable ash that provides ample fertilizer for three or four years of bountiful crops. On the cleared land nutrients leach out of the soil. However, and the land becomes too poor to support agriculture. New land is then cleared by burning, and the process starts again. Since most farming in the tropics uses this method. Forests in this region will eventually be permanently eradicated.
The argument depends on the assumption that
(A) forests in the tropics do not regenerate well enough to restore themselves once they have been cleared by the slash-and-burn method
(B) some other methods of agriculture are not as destructive to the environment in tropical regions as the slash-and-burn method is
(C) forests in the tropics are naturally deficient in nutrients that are needed to support the growth of paints that are not native to those regions
(D) slash-and-burn agriculture is particularly suitable for farming in tropical areas
(E) slash-and burn agriculture produces a more bountiful crop than do other agriculture methods for the first year
Source: LSAT
The argument depends on the assumption that
(A) forests in the tropics do not regenerate well enough to restore themselves once they have been cleared by the slash-and-burn method
(B) some other methods of agriculture are not as destructive to the environment in tropical regions as the slash-and-burn method is
(C) forests in the tropics are naturally deficient in nutrients that are needed to support the growth of paints that are not native to those regions
(D) slash-and-burn agriculture is particularly suitable for farming in tropical areas
(E) slash-and burn agriculture produces a more bountiful crop than do other agriculture methods for the first year
Source: LSAT
05 Oct 2017, 11:14
Kudos
Bookmarks
(A) forests in the tropics do not regenerate well enough to restore themselves once they have been cleared by the slash-and-burn method author says that due to this method, the forrest will be eradicated. The author is clearly assuming that the forest is not going to grow back.
(B) some other methods of agriculture are not as destructive to the environment in tropical regions as the slash-and-burn method is we do not care about other methods here
(C) forests in the tropics are naturally deficient in nutrients that are needed to support the growth of paints that are not native to those regions author is not assuming this because argument says otherwise
(D) slash-and-burn agriculture is particularly suitable for farming in tropical areas suitability is not mentioned so we cannot assume this
(E) slash-and burn agriculture produces a more bountiful crop than do other agriculture methods for the first year we don't know anything about other methods so this is out
(B) some other methods of agriculture are not as destructive to the environment in tropical regions as the slash-and-burn method is we do not care about other methods here
(C) forests in the tropics are naturally deficient in nutrients that are needed to support the growth of paints that are not native to those regions author is not assuming this because argument says otherwise
(D) slash-and-burn agriculture is particularly suitable for farming in tropical areas suitability is not mentioned so we cannot assume this
(E) slash-and burn agriculture produces a more bountiful crop than do other agriculture methods for the first year we don't know anything about other methods so this is out
19 Jul 2019, 17:06
Kudos
Bookmarks
From the prompt:
-Burning forest leaves vegetable ash
-Vegetable ash provides fertilizer for 3-4 years of crops
-Nutrients leave the soil and land can't support agriculture
-This leads to new land being cleared, the process repeats
We need to find an assumption that will lead to the conclusion that the forests will become permanently eradicated.
(A) forests in the tropics do not regenerate well enough to restore themselves once they have been cleared by the slash-and-burn method
This makes sense. If cleared forests provide fertilizer, why can't the forests just use that fertilizer to re-grow? We are assuming they cannot do this, which will lead to cleared land not growing back.
(B) some other methods of agriculture are not as destructive to the environment in tropical regions as the slash-and-burn method is
This may be true, but is irrelevant.
(C) forests in the tropics are naturally deficient in nutrients that are needed to support the growth of paints that are not native to those regions
Again, may be true, but is irrelevant.
(D) slash-and-burn agriculture is particularly suitable for farming in tropical areas
Again, may be true, but is irrelevant for us.
(E) slash-and burn agriculture produces a more bountiful crop than do other agriculture methods for the first year
We aren't concerned with comparing slash-and-burn agriculture to other methods. This is irrelevant.
The correct answer is answer choice A.
Please give kudos if this was helpful in any way!
-Burning forest leaves vegetable ash
-Vegetable ash provides fertilizer for 3-4 years of crops
-Nutrients leave the soil and land can't support agriculture
-This leads to new land being cleared, the process repeats
We need to find an assumption that will lead to the conclusion that the forests will become permanently eradicated.
(A) forests in the tropics do not regenerate well enough to restore themselves once they have been cleared by the slash-and-burn method
This makes sense. If cleared forests provide fertilizer, why can't the forests just use that fertilizer to re-grow? We are assuming they cannot do this, which will lead to cleared land not growing back.
(B) some other methods of agriculture are not as destructive to the environment in tropical regions as the slash-and-burn method is
This may be true, but is irrelevant.
(C) forests in the tropics are naturally deficient in nutrients that are needed to support the growth of paints that are not native to those regions
Again, may be true, but is irrelevant.
(D) slash-and-burn agriculture is particularly suitable for farming in tropical areas
Again, may be true, but is irrelevant for us.
(E) slash-and burn agriculture produces a more bountiful crop than do other agriculture methods for the first year
We aren't concerned with comparing slash-and-burn agriculture to other methods. This is irrelevant.
The correct answer is answer choice A.
Please give kudos if this was helpful in any way!
