Last visit was: 26 Apr 2024, 04:24 It is currently 26 Apr 2024, 04:24

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
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 4386
Own Kudos [?]: 32882 [102]
Given Kudos: 4455
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 4386
Own Kudos [?]: 32882 [14]
Given Kudos: 4455
Send PM
Manager
Manager
Joined: 26 Mar 2016
Posts: 51
Own Kudos [?]: 62 [13]
Given Kudos: 115
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V36
GRE 1: Q166 V147
GPA: 3.3
WE:Other (Consulting)
Send PM
General Discussion
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Jun 2014
Posts: 15
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [3]
Given Kudos: 423
Schools: Simon '19
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V38
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
3
Kudos
I can't believe there could be such stupid questions. Senseless.


2. It can be inferred from the passage that
· only thirty species of frogs and toads remain in Costa Rica
· humans do not have permeable skin
· the build-up of pollutants in the atmosphere causes a decrease in atmospheric ozone
· humans do not usually take signals of environmental deterioration seriously
· Costa Rica suffers from more serious environmental problems than many other countries


[Reveal] Spoiler:





3. The author uses the adjective “subtle” in the second paragraph most probably to emphasize that
· these effects are not easily recognized by sophisticated testing equipment
· these effects are difficult to notice because they take place over time on a global scale
· these effects are so minimal that they affect only small animal species such as amphibians
· these slight effects of human activity are rarely discussed by scientists
· these effects are infrequently observed because they affect only specific world regions


[Reveal] Spoiler:





4. The passage implies that
· many amphibians are not considered beautiful.
· the Monteverde Cloud Forest Preserve was not large enough to protect the golden toad.
· only Costa Rican amphibians living near Monteverde have disappeared since the 1980s.
· amphibians sometimes live in coal mines.
· no humans yet consider the decline of amphibious populations an indication of a threat to human populations.


[Reveal] Spoiler:
Intern
Intern
Joined: 19 May 2015
Posts: 23
Own Kudos [?]: 5 [1]
Given Kudos: 19
Concentration: General Management, International Business
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
1
Kudos
· Humans are at least partially responsible for changing weather patterns.
· Toads, like frogs, have permeable skin.
· Human activity is not necessarily responsible for the global decline of amphibious populations.
· Costa Rica’s Monteverde Cloud Forest Preserve was not paid for solely by the Costa Rican government.
· More frog and toad species than salamander species have disappeared in Costa Rica since the late 1980s.


2. It can be inferred from the passage that
· only thirty species of frogs and toads remain in Costa Rica
· humans do not have permeable skin- I did deduce 2 or 4 is correct. I was confused b/w 2 and 4. Got confused as option 2 was not written explicitly written in the passage. Got confused by the couple of last statements in the 2nd para.. :( :(
· the build-up of pollutants in the atmosphere causes a decrease in atmospheric ozone
· humans do not usually take signals of environmental deterioration seriously
· Costa Rica suffers from more serious environmental problems than many other countries
Intern
Intern
Joined: 17 Nov 2016
Posts: 11
Own Kudos [?]: 13 [4]
Given Kudos: 14
Location: United States
Schools: Fuqua '25
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
GPA: 3.3
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
4
Kudos
Please your help with Q7:

7. The passage implies that
A) the Monteverde area may be home to toad or frog species that have not yet been noted by researchers
B) the Monteverde Cloud Forest Preserve was not large enough to protect the golden toad
C) only Costa Rican amphibians living near Monteverde have disappeared since the 1980s
D) if amphibians did not have permeable skin, then they could not act as biological harbingers
E) more than one third of the world’s amphibian species have become extinct

How can A be correct? The passage says:

"Since that time, another twenty of the fifty species of frogs and toads known to once inhabit a 30 square kilometer area near Monteverde have disappeared".

It doesn't say that it was actually in the Monteverde area. Probably the Monteverde area was much more studied that the surrounding areas, so the existence of unknowned frogs and toads near Monteverde doesn't imply that there are unknowned frogs inside Monteverde. I know frogs and toads can move, but if I think like that, I would be considering that Monteverde is surrounded by no limits or by limits which frogs and toads can trespass, which we don't know.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 04 Feb 2016
Posts: 51
Own Kudos [?]: 24 [1]
Given Kudos: 4
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
GMAT 1: 650 Q48 V32
GPA: 4
WE:Sales (Computer Software)
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
1
Bookmarks
Got 5/7 Right [2 mins to read / 11.5 to answer all]

Adi93 : Below my reasoning for Q6.

Can someone please explain question number, 7? Got this incorrect.

For Q6.


(A) The first paragraph speculates on the causes of a global phenomenon; the second paragraph describes one specific example of this phenomenon.

(B) The first paragraph explains one environmental consequence of human activity; the second paragraph discusses solutions which might mitigate further environmental damage. -- 2nd para is not really about solutions.

(C) The first paragraph details one instance of an ecological change; the second paragraph discusses the import and global extent of this change. - Correct. Fits in perfectly.

(D) The first paragraph discusses efforts to protect the habitat of a particular species; the second paragraph advocates for additional habitat protection. Second para, focuses on how the problem might extend to a global scenario and presents the opinion of the author at the end.

(E) The first paragraph describes the unexplained worldwide disappearance of toads; the second paragraph adds that salamanders and frogs are also disappearing. First para is only restricted to the disappearance in Costa Rica.
Current Student
Joined: 04 Sep 2017
Status:Booth 1Y
Posts: 278
Own Kudos [?]: 1162 [1]
Given Kudos: 228
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Technology, Leadership
GMAT 1: 690 Q44 V41
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V38
GPA: 3.62
WE:Sales (Computer Software)
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
1
Kudos
I just got this question. Can we add it to the original post please? SajjadAhmad Bunuel workout

It can be inferred from the discussion of amphibians that

(A) only thirty species of frogs and toads remain in Costa Rica

(B) relatively few non-amphibious animals have permeable skin

(C) most have either already become extinct or are in danger of extinction

(D) humans do not usually take signals of environmental deterioration seriously

(E) the extinction of so many amphibian species supports the contention that humans are responsible for the situation

OA
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 92929
Own Kudos [?]: 619138 [1]
Given Kudos: 81609
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
1
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
MikeScarn wrote:
I just got this question. Can we add it to the original post please? SajjadAhmad Bunuel workout

It can be inferred from the discussion of amphibians that

(A) only thirty species of frogs and toads remain in Costa Rica

(B) relatively few non-amphibious animals have permeable skin

(C) most have either already become extinct or are in danger of extinction

(D) humans do not usually take signals of environmental deterioration seriously

(E) the extinction of so many amphibian species supports the contention that humans are responsible for the situation

OA

______________________________
Done. Thank you.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 06 Mar 2018
Posts: 56
Own Kudos [?]: 6 [2]
Given Kudos: 148
Location: India
GMAT 1: 600 Q47 V27
GRE 1: Q160 V150
GPA: 2.7
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
1
Kudos
for que 8 - author has no where mentioned about Permeable skin of non-amphibians, then why B is right ?
ESMT Berlin School Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2018
Status:The darker the night, the nearer the dawn!
Posts: 245
Own Kudos [?]: 448 [9]
Given Kudos: 104
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT 1: 640 Q50 V25
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
7
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
prags1989 wrote:
for que 8 - author has no where mentioned about Permeable skin of non-amphibians, then why B is right ?


8. It can be inferred from the discussion of amphibians that
Inference Qs in RC are masterstrokes by GMAT, as the test taker needs to be decisively precise and accurate.

Answer choice analysis:
Quote:
(A) only thirty species of frogs and toads remain in Costa Rica
    Excerpt from the passage:
      Since that time, another twenty of the fifty species of frogs and toads KNOWN to once inhabit a 30 square kilometer area near Monteverde have disappeared.

    The passage talks about the specis near Monteverde.
    Moreover, 20 out of 50 KNOWN species have disappeared.
    Does that imply that ONLY 30 species live in Costa Rica.
      No. Cannot say with 100% confidence. However, had the statement been - ONLY 30 KNOWN species live - It would have made sense.
    Look at this way -
      Statement says: The scientists have found 30 KNOWN species in Iceland.
      Does it imply that ONLY 30 species live in Iceland?
        No. Cannot say with 100% confidence because there is STILL possibility of OTHER species, which are NOT found yet.
    - It's Dicey -----> OUT
Quote:
(B) relatively few non-amphibious animals have permeable skin
    -I accept that B is an interesting answer choice. However, the other answer choices contain a SURESHOT error. Thus, by PoE, B is the champ!

Quote:
(C) most have either already become extinct or are in danger of extinction
    Excerpt from the passage:
      The unexplained, relatively sudden disappearance of amphibians in Costa Rica is not a unique story. Populations of frogs, toads, and salamanders have declined or disappeared the world over.
    The passage asserts ONLY about the different populations.
    A really STRONG claim. CANNOT substantiate that more than 50% of the species have either already become extinct or are in danger of extinction.

Quote:
(D) humans do NOT usually take signals of environmental deterioration seriously
    Excerpt from the passage:
      If amphibians are the biological harbingers of environmental problems, humans would be wise to heed their warning.
    In the last line, the author suggests that humans SHOULD heed to those warnings. Whether they do is NOWHERE discussed in the passage, let alone seriously.

Quote:
(E) the extinction of so many amphibian species supports the contention that humans are responsible for the situation
    Excerpt from the passage:
      Scientists hypothesize that the more subtle effects of human activities on the world’s ecosystems, such as the build-up of pollutants, the decrease in atmospheric ozone, and changing weather patterns due to global warming, are beginning to take their toll.

    It's a mere hypothesis. CANNOT say with 100% confidence.
    - It's Dicey -----> OUT
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 May 2019
Posts: 322
Own Kudos [?]: 243 [0]
Given Kudos: 54
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GPA: 4
WE:Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
Quote:
Bharath99 wrote:
CristianJuarez wrote:
Please your help with Q7:

7. The passage implies that
A) the Monteverde area may be home to toad or frog species that have not yet been noted by researchers
B) the Monteverde Cloud Forest Preserve was not large enough to protect the golden toad
C) only Costa Rican amphibians living near Monteverde have disappeared since the 1980s
D) if amphibians did not have permeable skin, then they could not act as biological harbingers
E) more than one third of the world’s amphibian species have become extinct.

Hi,

he word implies indicates that this is an inference question. The correct answer will not be stated explicitly in the passage; nevertheless, the information must be true according to information given somewhere in the passage. Wrong answers will often go “too far,” asserting something that might be plausible in the real world but is not directly supported by any specific information given in the passage.

(A) CORRECT. The last sentence of the first paragraph says that a certain proportion of the species of frogs and toads known to once inhabit an area near Monteverde have disappeared. The language known to indicates that the author is hedging: a total of fifty species are known to live there, but others might exist that have not yet been found or formally catalogued.



MentorTutoring AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma

In above explanation for option A "the Monteverde area may be home to toad or frog species that have not yet been noted by researchers".
The last sentence of the first paragraph says that a certain proportion of the species of frogs and toads known to once inhabit an area near Monteverde have disappeared.

How we can say that it is not noted by researchers yet ?
It seems researcher already knew this.

Kindly help.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 May 2019
Posts: 322
Own Kudos [?]: 243 [0]
Given Kudos: 54
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GPA: 4
WE:Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
Quote:
1. According to the passage, all of the following are true EXCEPT:
Option A Humans are at least partially responsible for changing weather patterns
(A) True. The third sentence of the second paragraph characterizes changing
weather patterns due to global warming as a subtle effect of human activities.
Option C Human activity is not necessarily responsible for the global decline of amphibious populations.
(C) True. The third sentence of the second paragraph states explicitly that scientists
“hypothesize” that human activity is responsible for the global decline of amphibious
populations. Since a hypothesis is an educated guess rather than a fact, it is true
that human activity may not be responsible for the decline.

carcass -The above explanation for Q1 is most absurd way to present.

How can you assume two opposite things from single statement ?

MentorTutoring AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma
Dear experts,
Can you explain how A and C can be true at same time or the question itself is wrong ?
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Posts: 3512
Own Kudos [?]: 6860 [2]
Given Kudos: 500
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
2
Kudos
Expert Reply
Harsh2111s wrote:
Quote:
Bharath99 wrote:
CristianJuarez wrote:
Please your help with Q7:

7. The passage implies that
A) the Monteverde area may be home to toad or frog species that have not yet been noted by researchers
B) the Monteverde Cloud Forest Preserve was not large enough to protect the golden toad
C) only Costa Rican amphibians living near Monteverde have disappeared since the 1980s
D) if amphibians did not have permeable skin, then they could not act as biological harbingers
E) more than one third of the world’s amphibian species have become extinct.

Hi,

he word implies indicates that this is an inference question. The correct answer will not be stated explicitly in the passage; nevertheless, the information must be true according to information given somewhere in the passage. Wrong answers will often go “too far,” asserting something that might be plausible in the real world but is not directly supported by any specific information given in the passage.

(A) CORRECT. The last sentence of the first paragraph says that a certain proportion of the species of frogs and toads known to once inhabit an area near Monteverde have disappeared. The language known to indicates that the author is hedging: a total of fifty species are known to live there, but others might exist that have not yet been found or formally catalogued.



MentorTutoring AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma

In above explanation for option A "the Monteverde area may be home to toad or frog species that have not yet been noted by researchers".
The last sentence of the first paragraph says that a certain proportion of the species of frogs and toads known to once inhabit an area near Monteverde have disappeared.

How we can say that it is not noted by researchers yet ?
It seems researcher already knew this.

Kindly help.

Hello, Harsh2111s. I had to look over that question twice before the process of elimination led me to (A). The line you paraphrased above, relative to answer (A), has a dual meaning. How about we look at the actual line and answer choice before we tease out the two interpretations?

Passage: Since that time, another twenty of the fifty species of frogs and toads known to once inhabit a 30 square kilometer area near Monteverde have disappeared.

Answer: (A) the Monteverde area may be home to toad or frog species that have not yet been noted by researchers

Interpretation #1: Researchers have not been able to locate thirty of the fifty species of frogs and toads once known to inhabit the area, so it is true that, at present, the area may, in fact, house more species, some of which may not have been documented in many years. Since the search for these species is ongoing, not yet been noted is qualified.

Interpretation #2: Researchers had at one point in time noted the thirty missing species, so not yet been noted is unqualified, period.

Your line of thought traced path #2, and I will admit that my mind went in that direction at first, too. However, when I was able to disprove the other answers, I reexamined (A) and saw that the first interpretation is just as valid. This was a tricky question, but it can be used to illustrate why you should not settle on an answer you know you can disprove when another answer just makes you uncertain. Choice (A), despite its ambiguity, is the best of the lot.

I hope that helps. If you have further questions, feel free to ask.

- Andrew
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Posts: 3512
Own Kudos [?]: 6860 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Harsh2111s wrote:
Quote:
1. According to the passage, all of the following are true EXCEPT:
Option A Humans are at least partially responsible for changing weather patterns
(A) True. The third sentence of the second paragraph characterizes changing
weather patterns due to global warming as a subtle effect of human activities.
Option C Human activity is not necessarily responsible for the global decline of amphibious populations.
(C) True. The third sentence of the second paragraph states explicitly that scientists
“hypothesize” that human activity is responsible for the global decline of amphibious
populations. Since a hypothesis is an educated guess rather than a fact, it is true
that human activity may not be responsible for the decline.

carcass -The above explanation for Q1 is most absurd way to present.

How can you assume two opposite things from single statement ?

MentorTutoring AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma
Dear experts,
Can you explain how A and C can be true at same time or the question itself is wrong ?

Hello again, Harsh2111s. If anything, this question underlines the importance of reading over each answer choice, time permitting. As soon as I reached (E), I thought, Eureka! To answer your question, though, I agree that choices (A) and (C) are mutually exclusive, and, furthermore, that (A) is the more problematic of the two. Whatever the source of the question may be, I propose a tweak for (A) to make it justifiable:

(A) Humans may be at least partially responsible for changing weather patterns.

This way, the definitive cause-and-effect relationship no longer holds, and choices (A) and (C) can both be supported by the passage. A hypothesis, indeed, is not an accepted fact. If you chose (A), I would suggest only that you read the other answer choices, since (E) is complete speculation and is the obvious candidate for the exception.

- Andrew
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14825
Own Kudos [?]: 64929 [2]
Given Kudos: 426
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
2
Kudos
Expert Reply
Harsh2111s wrote:
Quote:
Bharath99 wrote:
CristianJuarez wrote:
Please your help with Q7:

7. The passage implies that
A) the Monteverde area may be home to toad or frog species that have not yet been noted by researchers
B) the Monteverde Cloud Forest Preserve was not large enough to protect the golden toad
C) only Costa Rican amphibians living near Monteverde have disappeared since the 1980s
D) if amphibians did not have permeable skin, then they could not act as biological harbingers
E) more than one third of the world’s amphibian species have become extinct.

Hi,

he word implies indicates that this is an inference question. The correct answer will not be stated explicitly in the passage; nevertheless, the information must be true according to information given somewhere in the passage. Wrong answers will often go “too far,” asserting something that might be plausible in the real world but is not directly supported by any specific information given in the passage.

(A) CORRECT. The last sentence of the first paragraph says that a certain proportion of the species of frogs and toads known to once inhabit an area near Monteverde have disappeared. The language known to indicates that the author is hedging: a total of fifty species are known to live there, but others might exist that have not yet been found or formally catalogued.



MentorTutoring AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma

In above explanation for option A "the Monteverde area may be home to toad or frog species that have not yet been noted by researchers".
The last sentence of the first paragraph says that a certain proportion of the species of frogs and toads known to once inhabit an area near Monteverde have disappeared.

How we can say that it is not noted by researchers yet ?
It seems researcher already knew this.

Kindly help.


Option (A) is correct because of the use of the word "may". Had it said "the Monteverde area is home to toad or frog species that have not yet been noted by researchers", it would be incorrect because it is not implied by the passage.
'May' adds uncertainty and as long as the passage doesn't say "there are no unknown species", the sentence with 'may' is true.

When you say 'there are 50 known species of frogs", you are implying that there MAY be some unknown species too.

The only relevant part of the sentence you mentioned is this:
Since that time, another twenty of the fifty species of frogs and toads known to once inhabit a 30 square kilometer area near Monteverde have disappeared.

Perhaps there were/are some unknown species too.
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14825
Own Kudos [?]: 64929 [2]
Given Kudos: 426
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
2
Kudos
Expert Reply
Harsh2111s wrote:
Quote:
1. According to the passage, all of the following are true EXCEPT:
Option A Humans are at least partially responsible for changing weather patterns
(A) True. The third sentence of the second paragraph characterizes changing
weather patterns due to global warming as a subtle effect of human activities.
Option C Human activity is not necessarily responsible for the global decline of amphibious populations.
(C) True. The third sentence of the second paragraph states explicitly that scientists
“hypothesize” that human activity is responsible for the global decline of amphibious
populations. Since a hypothesis is an educated guess rather than a fact, it is true
that human activity may not be responsible for the decline.

carcass -The above explanation for Q1 is most absurd way to present.

How can you assume two opposite things from single statement ?

MentorTutoring AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma
Dear experts,
Can you explain how A and C can be true at same time or the question itself is wrong ?


Yes, (A) and (C) both can be true at the same time. Read that one critical sentence carefully.

"Scientists hypothesize that the more subtle effects of human activities on the world’s ecosystems, such as the build-up of pollutants, the decrease in atmospheric ozone, and changing weather patterns due to global warming, are beginning to take their toll."

Scientists hypothesise - so this is a hypothesis, NOT an established fact.
What is the hypothesis? That the more subtle effects of human activities are beginning to take their toll.

Hence, (C) is true: Human activity is not necessarily responsible for the global decline of amphibious populations.

What are the human activities that we are talking about? the build-up of pollutants, the decrease in atmospheric ozone, and changing weather patterns due to global warming
The passage tells us that these are human activities - that weather patterns are changing due to global warming (due to human activity) - this is not a hypothesis

Hence (A) is correct: Humans are at least partially responsible for changing weather patterns.

(A) and (C) are different implications from the same sentence and both hold.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Aug 2019
Posts: 30
Own Kudos [?]: 7 [0]
Given Kudos: 23
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
5. The primary purpose of the passage is to

(A) discuss the mysterious disappearance of Costa Rica’s golden toad.

(B) explain why human activity is undoubtedly to blame for the global decline of amphibious populations

(C) convince humans that they must minimize the global output of pollutants.

(D) describe the recent global decline of amphibious populations and hypothesize about its causes.

(E) urge humans to pay careful attention to important environmental changes.
I got stuck between the two Option B and Option D –
Option B - explain why human activity is undoubtedly to blame for the global decline of amphibious populations. Undoubtedly is quite harsh word, the passage provides reason “Scientists hypothesize” thus we will cross this option

Option D is right , excerpt from passage
First and second passage about the apparent decline and also, the statement “Scientists hypothesize” for hypothesize about its causes.
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Posts: 3512
Own Kudos [?]: 6860 [0]
Given Kudos: 500
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
Expert Reply
VeritasKarishma wrote:
Harsh2111s wrote:
Quote:
1. According to the passage, all of the following are true EXCEPT:
Option A Humans are at least partially responsible for changing weather patterns
(A) True. The third sentence of the second paragraph characterizes changing
weather patterns due to global warming as a subtle effect of human activities.
Option C Human activity is not necessarily responsible for the global decline of amphibious populations.
(C) True. The third sentence of the second paragraph states explicitly that scientists
“hypothesize” that human activity is responsible for the global decline of amphibious
populations. Since a hypothesis is an educated guess rather than a fact, it is true
that human activity may not be responsible for the decline.

carcass -The above explanation for Q1 is most absurd way to present.

How can you assume two opposite things from single statement ?

MentorTutoring AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma
Dear experts,
Can you explain how A and C can be true at same time or the question itself is wrong ?


Yes, (A) and (C) both can be true at the same time. Read that one critical sentence carefully.

"Scientists hypothesize that the more subtle effects of human activities on the world’s ecosystems, such as the build-up of pollutants, the decrease in atmospheric ozone, and changing weather patterns due to global warming, are beginning to take their toll."

Scientists hypothesise - so this is a hypothesis, NOT an established fact.
What is the hypothesis? That the more subtle effects of human activities are beginning to take their toll.

Hence, (C) is true: Human activity is not necessarily responsible for the global decline of amphibious populations.

What are the human activities that we are talking about? the build-up of pollutants, the decrease in atmospheric ozone, and changing weather patterns due to global warming
The passage tells us that these are human activities - that weather patterns are changing due to global warming (due to human activity) - this is not a hypothesis

Hence (A) is correct: Humans are at least partially responsible for changing weather patterns.

(A) and (C) are different implications from the same sentence and both hold.

I see the point you are making, VeritasKarishma, and I hold your views in high regard. At the same time, I believe a dual interpretation of the sentence in question still holds, namely the following:

1) The hypothesis resolves, exactly as you have outlined above: the more subtle effects of human activities are beginning to take their toll. The examples following such as are established effects of human activities.

2) The hypothesis never resolves, but encompasses the entire sentence, examples and all. That is, scientists are hypothesizing that human activities, such as... A, B, and C, are beginning to take their toll.

The structure of the sentence does not direct me to one interpretation or the other. I still advocate choice (E) as the clearcut exception, but I have read and considered the sentence from the passage quite carefully, and, as I have outlined above, I feel as though the evidence justifying choice (A) is ambiguous.

Thank you for your response. You are an asset to the community, I think everyone would agree.

- Andrew
Manager
Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 77
Own Kudos [?]: 83 [0]
Given Kudos: 187
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, International Business
GPA: 3.5
Send PM
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
13:25mins including 3mins of reading 6/8
I got Q5 Wrong, understood the reason behind it.
I got Q8 Wrong and What I am thinking is maybe there is a process of elimination involved in this one, but still not sure. Can someone please post Official Answer or explanation for Q8.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: The golden toad of Costa Rica, whose beauty and rarity inspired an unu [#permalink]
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6921 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
GRE Forum Moderator
13961 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne