MPRS22
Don't know what the experts think but A seems kind of weak. Even if they are not as valuable the conclusion doesn't fall; ie they can still create a source of profits if costs are lower. It is entirely possible they are only a few dollars less valuable or thousands of dollars less valuable. This is the same problem we find in C, they could be 10m below the surface, or 10,000. How can we safely eliminate C and not A?
Thanks
AndrewN VeritasKarishmaHello,
MPRS22. I agree that (A) is not the most satisfying answer in general. We are forced to conflate
not... as valuable as in the answer choice with a
substandard new source of profits from the passage. Sure, a manufactured emerald that sold for $9,999 instead of a natural one that might fetch $10,000 would undermine such reasoning, but we do not have any numbers to work with from the passage. Neither can we qualify
not found on the Earth's surface in (C). How deep would the company have to dig for the process to be deemed
mining?
IanStewart brings up an interesting consideration in his post, one that I had not thought to pursue.
In short, I am not exactly satisfied with any answer, but you are tasked with selecting what you think is the most reasonable answer of the five presented. (As an aside, I would not lose sleep over a Princeton Review question. Moderator
nightblade354 seems to be of a similar mind. Check out his response to another Hard Princeton Review CR question,
here.)
Thank you for thinking to ask me about this one. I wish I had a more definitive answer for you.
- Andrew