It is currently 21 Mar 2018, 05:41

### 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

# The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The municipality

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

GMAT Forum Moderator
Joined: 28 May 2014
Posts: 481
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The municipality [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Nov 2017, 06:38
1
KUDOS
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

68% (01:42) correct 32% (01:57) wrong based on 96 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.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 30 Oct 2017
Posts: 101
Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The municipality [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2017, 15:01
2
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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

Re: The Larynxtown industrial zone is infested with rats. The municipality   [#permalink] 05 Nov 2017, 15:01
Display posts from previous: Sort by