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.
Updated on: 04 Dec 2019, 10:11
Originally posted by vmdce129907 on 01 Oct 2012, 07:24.
Last edited by Sajjad1994 on 04 Dec 2019, 10:11, edited 1 time in total.
Last edited by Sajjad1994 on 04 Dec 2019, 10:11, edited 1 time in total.
Formatted
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
71% (01:38) correct
29%
(01:55)
wrong
based on 367
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The governor claims that the state faces a drought and has implemented new water-use restrictions; but that is just a move to get some free publicity for his reelection campaign. So far this year we have had 3.5 inches of rain, slightly more than the average amount of rain for the same period over the last three years.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the conclusion of the argument above?
A. The governor did not declare drought emergencies in the previous three years.
B. City officials who have the authority to mandate water-use restrictions have not done so.
C. The snow melt that usually contributes significantly to the state's reservoirs is several inches below normal.
D. The amount of water the state can draw from rivers that cross state boundaries is limited by federal law.
E. Water-use restrictions are short-term measures and do little to reduce long-term water consumption.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the conclusion of the argument above?
A. The governor did not declare drought emergencies in the previous three years.
B. City officials who have the authority to mandate water-use restrictions have not done so.
C. The snow melt that usually contributes significantly to the state's reservoirs is several inches below normal.
D. The amount of water the state can draw from rivers that cross state boundaries is limited by federal law.
E. Water-use restrictions are short-term measures and do little to reduce long-term water consumption.
Source: Master GMAT
01 Oct 2012, 07:50
Kudos
Bookmarks
vmdce129907
I used elimination to reach the answer in this case.
A is a general statement and is neutral so eliminated
B mentions city officials, which is out of scope..argument has nothing to do with view point of city offcials. Eliminated
D same as B, no mention of federal law, moreover, this is a general statement so is not affecting the argument, must be true for all years.
E strengthens the argument instead of weakening it
Hence C must be the answer
01 Oct 2012, 21:13
Kudos
Bookmarks
adineo
I think C strengthens the Conclusion rather than weakening it.
The conclusion is in the First line of the argument - "The governor claims that the state faces a drought and has implemented new water-use restrictions"
Counter premise in the argument says that rainfall this year had been little more than the average of what it had been in 3 previous years.
Hence The reasoning of the argument is the Claim made by Governor is false as there has been more rain this year.
In Order to weaken this reasoning that governor's claim is false, we have to prove that either this year has been more Rains Or anything related to previous years drought.
(C) in this essence strengthens the argument, by claiming that Snow melting has been less so Water is less hence governor's claim is justified.
I think (A) should be the correct response while Weakening the Governor's Claim because If the Governor did not declare drought in previous 3 years when the average rainfall had been less than what has occurred this year, then there is no point in the claim of Drought by the governor that this year be declared a Drought.
