It is currently 22 Nov 2017, 22:53

### 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

# Temperatures in the Pacific Northwest have risen steadily

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3452

Kudos [?]: 926 [2], given: 781

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2003, 17:33
2
KUDOS
11
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

85% (hard)

Question Stats:

58% (02:16) correct 42% (07:08) wrong based on 699 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Temperatures in the Pacific Northwest have risen steadily since 1981, averaging 2.07 degrees Fahrenheit warmer north of the 46th parallel than in the previous decade. Precipitation and water-table levels, which have historically maintained a measurable relationship to each other (within a scaled range of two to four points), have varied drastically from 1987 to 1991, sometimes deviating as much as six points in fewer than eight months. Reports from Canada indicate a similar median temperature increase, estimated at 2.02 degrees Fahrenheit; research from a 1992 study measures the relational swing in moisture levels at no more than three points.

Of the following, which conclusion is best supported by the evidence above?

The higher the temperature of a given area, the more likely it is that the water levels will vary.

The variation in temperature in the last decade has been less than the fluctuation of moisture.

When temperatures rise north of the 46th parallel, natural water exchange between land and atmosphere must change in the same proportion.

Within the last ten years, water table and precipitation levels have varied more in the Pacific Northwest than they have in Canada.

Canada will have more stability in weather than will the area of the United States above the 46th parallel.

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by pqhai on 24 Aug 2013, 00:28, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 926 [2], given: 781

Intern
Joined: 23 Aug 2003
Posts: 19

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

Location: ny

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2003, 18:59
I'll go with D. It's stated that the Pacific NW prec. and water table levels "have varied drastically" (6points is cited), but the moisture level swing in Canada was "no more than three points" (which is within the scaled range of 2-4 given as normal a few sentences before).

So, the precipitation and water table levels varied more in the Pac NW than in Canada.

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

SVP
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 1603

Kudos [?]: 308 [1], given: 0

### Show Tags

24 Sep 2003, 01:29
1
KUDOS
Also vote for D.

the Pacific Northwest—up to 6 points

Kudos [?]: 308 [1], given: 0

CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3452

Kudos [?]: 926 [0], given: 781

### Show Tags

24 Sep 2003, 13:55
stolyar wrote:
Also vote for D.

the Pacific NorthwestтАФup to 6 points

D is correct

i didnt see that moisture levels and precipitation/water levels are one and the same..

Kudos [?]: 926 [0], given: 781

Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 73

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

Location: california

### Show Tags

24 Sep 2003, 15:19
praet, stolyar where are you getting your questions from?...they're pretty challenging...

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

SVP
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 1603

Kudos [?]: 308 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

24 Sep 2003, 21:01
I got them from many sources: my own brain, LSAT materials, logic and linguistic books, some other forums, and so on.

Kudos [?]: 308 [0], given: 0

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10130

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

09 Mar 2015, 23:06
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 21 Apr 2015
Posts: 9

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 39

Schools: ISB '17
GMAT 1: 700 Q48 V38

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2015, 07:37
Praetorian wrote:
Temperatures in the Pacific Northwest have risen steadily since 1981, averaging 2.07 degrees Fahrenheit warmer north of the 46th parallel than in the previous decade. Precipitation and water-table levels, which have historically maintained a measurable relationship to each other (within a scaled range of two to four points), have varied drastically from 1987 to 1991, sometimes deviating as much as six points in fewer than eight months. Reports from Canada indicate a similar median temperature increase, estimated at 2.02 degrees Fahrenheit; research from a 1992 study measures the relational swing in moisture levels at no more than three points.

Of the following, which conclusion is best supported by the evidence above?

The higher the temperature of a given area, the more likely it is that the water levels will vary.

The variation in temperature in the last decade has been less than the fluctuation of moisture.

When temperatures rise north of the 46th parallel, natural water exchange between land and atmosphere must change in the same proportion.

Within the last ten years, water table and precipitation levels have varied more in the Pacific Northwest than they have in Canada.

Canada will have more stability in weather than will the area of the United States above the 46th parallel.

Can someone please suggest why is B not correct? I think the years mentioned in the stimuli do have some role to play as it is talking about different timeframe.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 39

Intern
Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Posts: 18

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 5

GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V45
GPA: 3.92

### Show Tags

22 Jul 2015, 13:17
I'm curious as to how so many people chose "D" as the right answer. There's no indication in the question that the water/precipitation levels for Canada have fluctuated "no more than" 3 points in the last decade. For all we know, a study in 1992 could merely be talking about the moisture fluctuations for solely that year. Aren't we all making a HUGE assumption here?

If you were making that assumption, then choice B could be correct as well, aside from the fact that you're comparing two completely unrelated numbers. Can anyone shed any light on this?

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 5

Current Student
Joined: 25 Jun 2015
Posts: 147

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 37

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Sustainability
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V33
WE: Operations (Manufacturing)

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2015, 08:16
BicepBrachii wrote:
I'm curious as to how so many people chose "D" as the right answer. There's no indication in the question that the water/precipitation levels for Canada have fluctuated "no more than" 3 points in the last decade. For all we know, a study in 1992 could merely be talking about the moisture fluctuations for solely that year. Aren't we all making a HUGE assumption here?

If you were making that assumption, then choice B could be correct as well, aside from the fact that you're comparing two completely unrelated numbers. Can anyone shed any light on this?

"research from a 1992 study measures the relational swing in moisture levels at no more than three points"...this is the last line of the passage. It is said in the passage that A stable level is in the range of 2 to 4 units(note the units).Hence,nothing is assumed and D is the correct choice.
hope this helps

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 37

Intern
Joined: 22 Jul 2015
Posts: 18

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 5

GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V45
GPA: 3.92

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2015, 09:06
manojsundar1 wrote:
BicepBrachii wrote:
I'm curious as to how so many people chose "D" as the right answer. There's no indication in the question that the water/precipitation levels for Canada have fluctuated "no more than" 3 points in the last decade. For all we know, a study in 1992 could merely be talking about the moisture fluctuations for solely that year. Aren't we all making a HUGE assumption here?

If you were making that assumption, then choice B could be correct as well, aside from the fact that you're comparing two completely unrelated numbers. Can anyone shed any light on this?

"research from a 1992 study measures the relational swing in moisture levels at no more than three points"...this is the last line of the passage. It is said in the passage that A stable level is in the range of 2 to 4 units(note the units).Hence,nothing is assumed and D is the correct choice.
hope this helps

Did you even read my response? My point of contention is that you are assuming that "a research study from 1992" is speaking for the last decade. How can you make that assumption without the passage saying so?

Please don't offer a response if you're not going to contribute anything new; what you have said is simply a rehash of what was said above.

I am not saying that there is a better answer than D among the other answers, but I am making the claim that choice D is a horribly written "right" choice.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 5

Board of Directors
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2680

Kudos [?]: 437 [0], given: 200

Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE: General Management (Transportation)

### Show Tags

22 Apr 2016, 20:51
I eliminated all but A and D. D seemed more appropriate..took me over 2 minutes to solve it...what's the source??

Kudos [?]: 437 [0], given: 200

Intern
Joined: 15 Jan 2016
Posts: 18

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 37

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2016, 07:21
Praetorian wrote:
Temperatures in the Pacific Northwest have risen steadily since 1981, averaging 2.07 degrees Fahrenheit warmer north of the 46th parallel than in the previous decade. Precipitation and water-table levels, which have historically maintained a measurable relationship to each other (within a scaled range of two to four points), have varied drastically from 1987 to 1991, sometimes deviating as much as six points in fewer than eight months. Reports from Canada indicate a similar median temperature increase, estimated at 2.02 degrees Fahrenheit; research from a 1992 study measures the relational swing in moisture levels at no more than three points.

Of the following, which conclusion is best supported by the evidence above?

The higher the temperature of a given area, the more likely it is that the water levels will vary.

The variation in temperature in the last decade has been less than the fluctuation of moisture.

When temperatures rise north of the 46th parallel, natural water exchange between land and atmosphere must change in the same proportion.

Within the last ten years, water table and precipitation levels have varied more in the Pacific Northwest than they have in Canada.

Canada will have more stability in weather than will the area of the United States above the 46th parallel.

How would someone know "Precipitation and water-table" is same as "moisture levels", unless he is a SME?

Any thought/idea on how to identify & tackle such technicalities in case we encounter such cases in real GMAT?

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 37

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3200

Kudos [?]: 3521 [1], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2016, 06:00
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
Praetorian wrote:
Temperatures in the Pacific Northwest have risen steadily since 1981, averaging 2.07 degrees Fahrenheit warmer north of the 46th parallel than in the previous decade. Precipitation and water-table levels, which have historically maintained a measurable relationship to each other (within a scaled range of two to four points), have varied drastically from 1987 to 1991, sometimes deviating as much as six points in fewer than eight months. Reports from Canada indicate a similar median temperature increase, estimated at 2.02 degrees Fahrenheit; research from a 1992 study measures the relational swing in moisture levels at no more than three points.

Of the following, which conclusion is best supported by the evidence above?

The higher the temperature of a given area, the more likely it is that the water levels will vary.

The variation in temperature in the last decade has been less than the fluctuation of moisture.

When temperatures rise north of the 46th parallel, natural water exchange between land and atmosphere must change in the same proportion.

Within the last ten years, water table and precipitation levels have varied more in the Pacific Northwest than they have in Canada.

Canada will have more stability in weather than will the area of the United States above the 46th parallel.

How would someone know "Precipitation and water-table" is same as "moisture levels", unless he is a SME?

Any thought/idea on how to identify & tackle such technicalities in case we encounter such cases in real GMAT?

In real GMAT, one is not expected to use any outside knowledge in order to arrive at the correct answer. Rather, using outside knowledge may sometimes lead to a wrong answer. The subject question appears to be a bit too demanding on this aspect.

Kudos [?]: 3521 [1], given: 22

CR Forum Moderator
Status: The best is yet to come.....
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 471

Kudos [?]: 202 [0], given: 192

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2017, 10:11
sayantanc2k wrote:
Praetorian wrote:
Temperatures in the Pacific Northwest have risen steadily since 1981, averaging 2.07 degrees Fahrenheit warmer north of the 46th parallel than in the previous decade. Precipitation and water-table levels, which have historically maintained a measurable relationship to each other (within a scaled range of two to four points), have varied drastically from 1987 to 1991, sometimes deviating as much as six points in fewer than eight months. Reports from Canada indicate a similar median temperature increase, estimated at 2.02 degrees Fahrenheit; research from a 1992 study measures the relational swing in moisture levels at no more than three points.

Of the following, which conclusion is best supported by the evidence above?

The higher the temperature of a given area, the more likely it is that the water levels will vary.

The variation in temperature in the last decade has been less than the fluctuation of moisture.

When temperatures rise north of the 46th parallel, natural water exchange between land and atmosphere must change in the same proportion.

Within the last ten years, water table and precipitation levels have varied more in the Pacific Northwest than they have in Canada.

Canada will have more stability in weather than will the area of the United States above the 46th parallel.

How would someone know "Precipitation and water-table" is same as "moisture levels", unless he is a SME?

Any thought/idea on how to identify & tackle such technicalities in case we encounter such cases in real GMAT?

In real GMAT, one is not expected to use any outside knowledge in order to arrive at the correct answer. Rather, using outside knowledge may sometimes lead to a wrong answer. The subject question appears to be a bit too demanding on this aspect.

I eliminated option D thinking these are not same.

However, I am not convinced why option B is incorrect. Any explanation, please?

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

Hasan Mahmud

Kudos [?]: 202 [0], given: 192

VP
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1082

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 541

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: 314 Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)

### Show Tags

17 Sep 2017, 00:18
Praetorian wrote:
Temperatures in the Pacific Northwest have risen steadily since 1981, averaging 2.07 degrees Fahrenheit warmer north of the 46th parallel than in the previous decade. Precipitation and water-table levels, which have historically maintained a measurable relationship to each other (within a scaled range of two to four points), have varied drastically from 1987 to 1991, sometimes deviating as much as six points in fewer than eight months. Reports from Canada indicate a similar median temperature increase, estimated at 2.02 degrees Fahrenheit; research from a 1992 study measures the relational swing in moisture levels at no more than three points.

Of the following, which conclusion is best supported by the evidence above?

The higher the temperature of a given area, the more likely it is that the water levels will vary.

The variation in temperature in the last decade has been less than the fluctuation of moisture.

When temperatures rise north of the 46th parallel, natural water exchange between land and atmosphere must change in the same proportion.

Within the last ten years, water table and precipitation levels have varied more in the Pacific Northwest than they have in Canada.

Canada will have more stability in weather than will the area of the United States above the 46th parallel.

This was a hard one for me Initially i was not able to make any inference so took a long time to answer this one .
We can see that the average rise of the temperature of the two places in argument north of pacific had 2.07 degrees Fahrenheit whereas Canada had 2.02 degrees Fahrenheit so only option D can be concluded.
_________________

We are more often frightened than hurt; and we suffer more from imagination than from reality

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 541

Re: Temperatures in the Pacific Northwest have risen steadily   [#permalink] 17 Sep 2017, 00:18
Display posts from previous: Sort by