GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 18 Aug 2018, 07:51

### 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

# The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Oct 2013
Posts: 433
The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2014, 05:14
4
8
00:00

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

67% (01:50) correct 33% (01:53) wrong based on 588 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The municipality introduced DDA poison, improving the situation, but resulting in the death of many Klacktop birds. To prevent the death of the Klacktops, DDB poison was introduced which resulted in the death of many Gellowtop frogs. Some of the public believe that since the rat infestation poses a significant threat to the Larynxtown citizens' health, any measures, irrelevant of the harm caused to wildlife, must be taken to cease it. The industrial zone neighbors the habitats of certain wildlife species that are protected by law so the introduction of poisons is probably not the solution to this particular infestation.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A) The first provides support for the argument's main position; the second objects to this position.
B) The first states a position that challenges that supported by the argument's conclusion; the second is evidence used to further support that conclusion.
C) The first challenges the main position of the argument; the second gives support to that challenge.
D) The first describes evidence that supports the argument's conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
E) The first is a position that opposes that established by the argument; the second is a conclusion to the argument.
Director
Joined: 05 Sep 2010
Posts: 768
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2014, 06:11
E it is :The first is a position that opposes that established by the argument; the second is a conclusion to the argument.
Director
Status: Everyone is a leader. Just stop listening to others.
Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 871
Location: India
GPA: 3.51
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jun 2014, 08:04
"that established by the argument" : please define this part of the answer.

Position established so far in the argument before that bold part or what argument trying to establish as a whole i.e. final conclusion.

If I infer what argument establishes as a whole i.e conclusion then E is not correct answer.

I was between D and E.
_________________

Piyush K
-----------------------
Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is to try just one more time. ― Thomas A. Edison
Don't forget to press--> Kudos
My Articles: 1. WOULD: when to use? | 2. All GMATPrep RCs (New)
Tip: Before exam a week earlier don't forget to exhaust all gmatprep problems specially for "sentence correction".

Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 187
Location: United States
Schools: Duke '20 (D)
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V27
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V37
GPA: 3.2
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Aug 2015, 12:03
PiyushK wrote:
"that established by the argument" : please define this part of the answer.

Position established so far in the argument before that bold part or what argument trying to establish as a whole i.e. final conclusion.

If I infer what argument establishes as a whole i.e conclusion then E is not correct answer.

I was between D and E.

"that established by the argument" = argument/conclusion = The industrial zone neighbors the habitats of certain wildlife species that are protected by law so the introduction of poisons is probably not the solution to this particular infestation.
Manager
Joined: 01 Jun 2013
Posts: 119
GMAT 1: 650 Q50 V27
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2015, 00:33
3
The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The municipality introduced DDA poison, improving the situation, but resulting in the death of many Klacktop birds. To prevent the death of the Klacktops, DDB poison was introduced which resulted in the death of many Gellowtop frogs. Some of the public believe that since the rat infestation poses a significant threat to the Larynxtown citizens' health, any measures, irrelevant of the harm caused to wildlife, must be taken to cease it. The industrial zone neighbors the habitats of certain wildlife species that are protected by law so the introduction of poisons is probably not the solution to this particular infestation.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A) The first provides support for the argument's main position; the second objects to this position.
B) The first states a position that challenges that supported by the argument's conclusion; the second is evidence used to further support that conclusion.
C) The first challenges the main position of the argument; the second gives support to that challenge.
D) The first describes evidence that supports the argument's conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
E) The first is a position that opposes that established by the argument; the second is a conclusion to the argument.

Two colored (in red) words determine the role of the portions.
1- First is a believe, so it cannot be an evidence. And it is against (oppose, challenge) the second bold portion. Thus, we eliminate A and D
2- Just prior to the second bold portion "SO" indicates that it is the conclusion of the argument and it is not supported by the 1st bold portion. Thus, eliminate B and C.
_________________

Please kindly click on "+1 Kudos", if you think my post is useful

Intern
Joined: 30 Nov 2016
Posts: 15
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jan 2017, 06:58
I don't really get the reasoning of the passage. Please explain.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3188
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jan 2017, 00:05
hongson1706 wrote:
I don't really get the reasoning of the passage. Please explain.

The argument is as follows:

Premise 1: Poisons kill both rats and wildlife.
Premise 2: Wildlife is protected by law.
Conclusion: Poisons cannot be used to kill rats...... (BF2)

Counter-view: Poisons should be used to kill rats irrespective of harm to wildlife. (BF1)

Please let me know, if you still have doubts.
Manager
Joined: 06 Oct 2015
Posts: 53
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jan 2017, 11:21
hongson1706 wrote:
I don't really get the reasoning of the passage. Please explain.

the argument starts off with some background information on the zone's battle with rats. It talks about various poisons the zone used to try to kill off the rats, and the collateral damage that comes with them (killing off birds and frogs.) These lead to the conclusion (triggered by the word BELIEVE) that residents assert, that all measures are necessary to stop the spread of rats.

So at this point you know boldface one serves as a conclusion of the argument asserted by the citizens.

The final sentence introduces the new piece of information that the zone is close to a protected habitat area SO it's probably not the best idea to go shock and awe on the rats at the risk of harming the other animals in the area.

So at this point we know the author's conclusion, that it's not the best idea to take any means necessary to rid the zone of rats.

Therefore, the boldface serves the roles of (1) a conclusion asserted by the residents that is the opposite of the authors and (2) the author's conclusion.

The only one that fits this structure is E. Hope this helps!

PA
Retired Moderator
Joined: 28 May 2014
Posts: 528
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The municipality  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Nov 2017, 06:38
1
The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The municipality introduced DDA poison, improving the situation, but resulting in the death of many Klacktop birds. To prevent the death of the Klacktops, DDB poison was introduced which resulted in the death of many Gellowtop frogs. Some of the public believe that since the rat infestation poses a significant threat to the Larynxtown citizens' health, any measures, irrelevant of the harm caused to wildlife, must be taken to cease it. The industrial zone neighbors the habitats of certain wildlife species that are protected by law so the introduction of poisons is probably not the solution to this particular infestation.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(a) The first provides support for the argument's main position; the second objects to this position.
(b) The first states a position that challenges that supported by the argument's conclusion; the second is evidence used to further support that conclusion.
(c) The first challenges the main position of the argument; the second gives support to that challenge.
(d) The first describes evidence that supports the argument's conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
(e) The first is a position that opposes that established by the argument; the second is a conclusion to the argument.
_________________
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 30 Oct 2017
Posts: 157
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The municipality  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2017, 15:01
2
1
saswata4s wrote:
The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The municipality introduced DDA poison, improving the situation, but resulting in the death of many Klacktop birds. To prevent the death of the Klacktops, DDB poison was introduced which resulted in the death of many Gellowtop frogs. Some of the public believe that since the rat infestation poses a significant threat to the Larynxtown citizens' health, any measures, irrelevant of the harm caused to wildlife, must be taken to cease it. The industrial zone neighbors the habitats of certain wildlife species that are protected by law so the introduction of poisons is probably not the solution to this particular infestation.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(a) The first provides support for the argument's main position; the second objects to this position.
(b) The first states a position that challenges that supported by the argument's conclusion; the second is evidence used to further support that conclusion.
(c) The first challenges the main position of the argument; the second gives support to that challenge.
(d) The first describes evidence that supports the argument's conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
(e) The first is a position that opposes that established by the argument; the second is a conclusion to the argument.

Carolyn from Magoosh here!

First, let's identify exactly what the argument is here. Two poisons were introduced to try and curb the rat infestation, but the first hurt birds and the second hurt frogs. These first few sentences are pieces of evidence (information) that gives us context for the argument. Now, some people believe that the damage to the birds and frogs should be ignored, since the rat infestation is a major health threat (so far it's unclear how this fits in). And finally, we are told that this area is right next to a protected habitat, so poisons should probably not be used. Now, this looks a lot like a conclusion. Whenever we see certain trigger words, like "so", "consequently", "thus", "therefore", and so on, that's a really good indication that whatever follows is some sort of conclusion. This seems to follow well from the other evidence provided in the passage.

Now, let's to back to the first bolded part. This statement would lead to an opposite conclusion - that poison should be used. So this would be best classified as "a position that opposes that established by the argument". This leads us to answer E

-Carolyn
_________________

Magoosh Test Prep

Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Apr 2014
Posts: 484
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2017, 03:30

Was scratching my head looking for "main verb" in the last sentence to understand what it means, until i realized that "neighbors" is not subject but the actual main verb. Took good amount of time, need to strengthen my SC kills.
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The &nbs [#permalink] 07 Nov 2017, 03:30
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Events & Promotions

 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®.