It is currently 19 Nov 2017, 09:21

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

So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed

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

Hide Tags

Senior CR Moderator
User avatar
D
Status: Long way to go!
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Posts: 1243

Kudos [?]: 1005 [0], given: 60

Location: Viet Nam
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Oct 2017, 22:04
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

40% (01:38) correct 60% (01:55) wrong based on 139 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed Golden Lake Development would interfere with bird-migration patterns. However, the fact that these same people have raised environmental objections to virtually every development proposal brought before the council in recent years indicates that their expressed concern for bird-migration patterns is nothing but a mask for their anti-development, anti-progress agenda. Their claim, therefore, should be dismissed without further consideration.

For the claim that the concern expressed by the so-called environmentalists is not their real concern to be properly drawn on the basis of the evidence cited, which one of the following must be assumed?

(A) Not every development proposal opposed in recent years by these so-called environmentalists was opposed because they believed it to pose a threat to the environment.

(B) People whose real agenda is to block development wherever it is proposed always try to disguise their true motives.

(C) Anyone who opposes unrestricted development is an opponent of progress.

(D) The council has no reason to object to the proposed Golden Lake Development other than concern about the development’s effect on bird-migration patterns.

(E) When people say that they oppose a development project solely on environmental grounds, their real concern almost always lies elsewhere.

Source: LSAT
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Actual LSAT CR bank by Broall

How to solve quadratic equations - Factor quadratic equations
Factor table with sign: The useful tool to solve polynomial inequalities
Applying AM-GM inequality into finding extreme/absolute value

New Error Log with Timer

Kudos [?]: 1005 [0], given: 60

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 18 Nov 2009
Posts: 65

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 64

Re: So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Oct 2017, 23:00
B?
B would imply that all their environmental objections are just there to conceal their anti development goals?

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 64

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 29 Aug 2017
Posts: 1

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

Re: So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Oct 2017, 00:12
Is it C? As it implies that whenever someone opposes a plan they are against progress?


Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum

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

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 12

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 18

CAT Tests
Re: So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Oct 2017, 20:16
IMO B

Negating it: People whose real agenda is to block development wherever it is proposed never try to disguise their true motives.
Breaks the conclusion

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 18

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 05 Dec 2014
Posts: 117

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 125

CAT Tests
Re: So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Oct 2017, 00:06
broall wrote:
So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed Golden Lake Development would interfere with bird-migration patterns. However, the fact that these same people have raised environmental objections to virtually every development proposal brought before the council in recent years indicates that their expressed concern for bird-migration patterns is nothing but a mask for their anti-development, anti-progress agenda. Their claim, therefore, should be dismissed without further consideration.

For the claim that the concern expressed by the so-called environmentalists is not their real concern to be properly drawn on the basis of the evidence cited, which one of the following must be assumed?

(A) Not every development proposal opposed in recent years by these so-called environmentalists was opposed because they believed it to pose a threat to the environment.

(B) People whose real agenda is to block development wherever it is proposed always try to disguise their true motives.

(C) Anyone who opposes unrestricted development is an opponent of progress.

(D) The council has no reason to object to the proposed Golden Lake Development other than concern about the development’s effect on bird-migration patterns.

(E) When people say that they oppose a development project solely on environmental grounds, their real concern almost always lies elsewhere.

Source: LSAT


Hi broall,
Can u please confirm the OA. To me the answer seems B. But the OA is A. If possible can u kindly explain the answer choice A

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 125

1 KUDOS received
Senior CR Moderator
User avatar
D
Status: Long way to go!
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Posts: 1243

Kudos [?]: 1005 [1], given: 60

Location: Viet Nam
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Oct 2017, 00:34
1
This post received
KUDOS
OE from Kaplan:

For all the verbiage of the question stem, all we really need to do is to find the assumption that will make the author’s argument valid, and we’ve already seen from the previous question what’s missing from the argument: The author questions the environmentalists’ argument against the development on the basis of the fact that they’ve objected to just about every other development plan in the past, but we don’t know if these were valid objections or not because we don’t know the circumstances of the objections. The author believes these objections were based not on the facts but on the environmentalists’ agenda. If, in fact, some or all of these objections are shown to be invalid, then she may have a legitimate point, and it would be more reasonable to believe that they really aren’t all that concerned with the migration patterns. (A) works in this vein: It tells us that, indeed, not every proposal was challenged because it posed a threat to the environment. If we add the sentiment in (A) to the mix, then our author has good reason to doubt the validity of their claim.

(B) The assumption that development-blockers always disguise their motives is neither reasonable nor helpful in this context. It’s not necessary to say that all development-blockers disguise their motives in order to argue that these people may be doing that.

(C) goes way too far—we don’t know anything about people who oppose “unrestricted development,” so any assumptions about them won’t help the author’s argument.

(D)’s out as well, since other reasons for objecting to the development are totally beyond the scope. They won’t help the author at all. In fact, if anything, (D) suggests that the environmentalists’ professed concern for the birds is genuine.

(E) is too vague, since it talks about people who oppose development on environmental grounds in general, while we’re concerned with this specific group. Furthermore, the explanation that their concern almost always lies elsewhere is too vague to pin this rap on the environmentalists in question.

• Notice that this is the last of five—count em’, five!—double-question stimuli on this section. That’s fairly high for an LSAT Logical Reasoning section. But remember that every double-question stimuli presents an opportunity to get two points for the price of one, so you should welcome these and look to use your work on the first question to help you work through the second.
_________________

Actual LSAT CR bank by Broall

How to solve quadratic equations - Factor quadratic equations
Factor table with sign: The useful tool to solve polynomial inequalities
Applying AM-GM inequality into finding extreme/absolute value

New Error Log with Timer

Kudos [?]: 1005 [1], given: 60

Re: So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed   [#permalink] 26 Oct 2017, 00:34
Display posts from previous: Sort by

So-called environmentalists have argued that the proposed

  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®.