News Reporter: In the last five years, several residents of Hyper

Question

News Reporter: In the last five years, several residents of Hyper village have reported the sighting of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) in the night sky. Just because the theory of aliens visiting Earth in UFOs has been investigated and discarded by scientists several decades ago when similar sightings had been reported, it does not mean that the residents are making up stories about the sightings. Therefore ,the scientists and local authorities should lead an immediate investigation into the visits of aliens in UFOs.

Which of the following would, if true, most seriously weaken the reporter's argument?

A. Recently, many TV channels in Hyper have started airing programs depicting the possibility of the existence of aliens.
B. Most of the people who reported the sightings in the last five years live alone in the village.
C. All the reports made in the last five years were made by people who were at the time out on a solitary night walk.
D. Majority of the people of Hyper are great believers of science and scientific research.
E. Many people in Hyper village are in two minds when it comes to believing in theories about aliens and UFOs.

Nipungupta9081 · Answer

Got Confused between A and C - will go with C.

A. Recently, many TV channels in Hyper have started airing programs depicting the possibility of the existence of aliens. - This choice takes into consideration about NOW. ( X )
B. Most of the people who reported the sightings in the last five years live alone in the village. - IRRELEVANT ( X )

C. All the reports made in the last five years were made by people who were at the time out on a solitary night walk. - Since everyone who was out on a Night walk they must have seen something else => which they thought is a UFO ( ✔ )

D. Majority of the people of Hyper are great believers of science and scientific research. - IRRELEVANT ( X )

E. Many people in Hyper village are in two minds when it comes to believing in theories about aliens and UFOs. - Out of Scope ( X )
Show Answer

haithamnimer · Answer

Conclusion: Therefore,the scientists and local authorities should lead an immediate investigation into the visits of aliens in UFOs
We need to weaken the argument by attacking the conclusion!

A. Recently, many TV channels in Hyper have started airing programs depicting the possibility of the existence of aliens. -- it strengthens the argument that local authority should not investigate! 
B. Most of the people who reported the sightings in the last five years live alone in the village. -- So??? no tie to the argument 
C. All the reports made in the last five years were made by people who were at the time out on a solitary night walk. --  Same as before when people see these aliens and authorities did not investigate! THUS, if the same repeat in the future, why authorities should investigate now?  
D. Majority of the people of Hyper are great believers of science and scientific research. -- Tricky, but in contrast, this strengthens the argument that local authority should not investigate! 
E. Many people in Hyper village are in two minds when it comes to believing in theories about aliens and UFOs. Out of scope

penco · Answer

Situation: In the last five years, several residents of Hyper village have reported the sighting of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) in the night sky.
Okay, so what ?
Reasoning: Just because the theory of aliens visiting Earth in UFOs has been investigated and discarded by scientists several decades ago when similar sightings had been reported, it does not mean that the residents are making up stories about the sightings.

Author of argument is giving reasoning to consider it for further investigation and not discard it as a mere hearsay.

Conclusion: The scientists and local authorities should lead an immediate investigation into the visits of aliens in UFOs.

Question stem asks to weaken the conclusion.
That means, we need to have alternate reasoning to how that scientists and local authorities should not lead immediate investigation or investigation.
The only evidence we have is people sighting UFO's.
If we can attack the evidence in any case, it would do the work for us.

Lets get to options:

Even if many TV channels have started airing about existence of aliens, it cannot attack the conclusion.
It instead shows that people might have started believing there is something, that's why news channels have started airing about it. In any scenario, it gives more incentive to lead investigation on what is happening.

Even if people live alone, those sightings are true. We cannot discredit the sighting on the mere factor that people were alone. They might be highly intellectuals or scientists or observers. This option does not give us any solid criterion for attacking the conclusion. Even if we are able to discredit one or two cases, we cannot discredit most of the cases on mere factor of loneliness. It is saying most but not all. 6/10 is most. 4 cases might still be well observers

Okay. This indicates a pattern by saying all of the reports were made by same pattern. So, if we are able to discredit that pattern, it will result in all the cases being spurious and hence give incentive to not pursue the investigation.
There might be different factors included here:
1- Solitary- It is saying all cases were by people on solitary walks. So, there were no other people to verify. This might signify, they just made that up. If we see from the leading authority POV, they might able to refute that no one can verify the findings. So we can definitely attack the conclusion. It will help in weakening the argument.
2- Night walk- This is not as strong as 'Solitary' but from the leading authority's POV, they can combine both and say, it might be something else. Maybe stars or maybe something else.
This option gives strong evidence to discredit all the evidences and hence can be considered as a valid answer.'

This option could instead strengthen the conclusion by saying all people respect science and hence could be considered as valid sightings. Giving more incentive to pursue the investigation for them. This instead strengthens.

The first trigger here would be 'Many' not all. Even if many people are of 2 minds, we cannot say all were of 2 minds. This option help us attack the conclusion or discredit any evidence. We can pass this one.

We can go with  C  as answer .

mSKR · Answer

Premise: Residents are not making up stories about the sightings.
Conclusion: should lead an immediate investigation

A. Recently, many TV channels in Hyper have started airing programs depicting the possibility of the existence of aliens.
Out of scope: Scientists and local authorities should lead an immediate investigation has no relation with what TV channels present.
They want to do investigation based on resident stories not because of some programs. This premise has no relation with conclusion

B. Most of the people who reported the sightings in the last five years live alone in the village.
Out of scope: For B , even if they don’t live alone, it should not impact the conclusion.

C. All the reports made in the last five years were made by people who were at the time out on a solitary night walk.-CORRECT 
This statement claim that people were alone and it might be possible either they had made up stories or what they have seen may not be UFO/aliens. It gives indication of weakening the claim of stories. Hence it tends to weaken the conclusion.
Moreover, C covers the entire scope by saying all reports. It would have strengthen then claim even if it would have used most reports.

D. Majority of the people of Hyper are great believers of science and scientific research.
Opposite: If we consider this claim, it tends to strengthen the claim that investigation should happen

E. Many people in Hyper village are in two minds when it comes to believing in theories about aliens and UFOs.
Irrelevant: Their two minds or multiple minds has no effect on conclusion. The discussion is based on stories and we need to find out whether we can find some claim that can weaken the claim based on stories. The claim given in option has no effect on conclusion or on any premises.

asbaj · Answer

A. Recently, many TV channels in Hyper have started airing programs depicting the possibility of the existence of aliens.
   Irrelevant , the airing of programs depicting the possibility of aliens existing doesn't strongly weaken the reporter's argument. 
B. Most of the people who reported the sightings in the last five years live alone in the village.
  This option tries to discredit  *MOST*  of the people who reported the sightings by saying that they do not have any other witnesses to corroborate what they are claiming. Let's come 
 back to this. 
C. All the reports made in the last five years were made by people who were at the time out on a solitary night walk.
  This option does slightly better, it tries to discredit *ALL* the people who have claimed to have seen UFOs suggesting they were out on a solitary (alone), night walk (limited visual 
 abilities), this one is trying to hint at the possibility that what these folks saw may not have been UFOs after all but something else (A lighthouse?, a plane?) - Let's hold on to this until a 
 better solution appears 
D. Majority of the people of Hyper are great believers of science and scientific research.
   Irrelevant , if anything this provides more credibility to the people. Definitely not a weakener. 
E. Many people in Hyper village are in two minds when it comes to believing in theories about aliens and UFOs.
   Irrelevant , it doesn't matter how people believe about the existence of aliens, it doesn't discredit the people making the citings.
 
 B vs C: C "most seriously weakens" the argument given the extra constraints.

Looks like C is the best answer after all and others can be eliminated through POE.

haithamnimer · Answer

Hello Bunnel,

Hope you are doing fine.

I am very sorry to disturb you, but i have posted many detailed posts in order to receive kudos.
However, many of these posts did not receive the kudos up to now! is there any reason for tha?

Bunuel · Answer

__________________ Wait and be patient.

Raman109 · Answer

Understanding the argument - 
News Reporter: In the last five years, several residents of Hyper village have reported the sighting of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) in the night sky. - "several" in English means more than 2 but not many. Background information. 
Just because the theory of aliens visiting Earth in UFOs has been investigated and discarded by scientists several decades ago when similar sightings had been reported, it does not mean that the residents are making up stories about the sightings. - Premise + Opinion.
Therefore ,the scientists and local authorities should lead an immediate investigation into the visits of aliens in UFOs. - Conclusion.

Prethinking - 
what if multiple people in "several" - "more than 2 but not many" saw the same sighting - it increases the credibility. We have more proof points to verify. 
What if all sightings were reported by one person - Weakener. 
What if the person is always alone when he/she sees the UFO - there is nothing to validate against or prove. Weakener.

Option Elimination -

A. Recently, many TV channels in Hyper have started airing programs depicting the possibility of the existence of aliens. - It could be weakener, but "Recently" is a spoil spot. How recently, 5 years or 5 days? Ambiguous effect.

B. Most of the people who reported the sightings in the last five years live alone in the village. - If two people living alone saw the same sighting - that actually increases the credibility and not otherwise. Or they were alone when they saw the UFO. Distortion.

C. All the reports made in the last five years were made by people who were at the time out on a solitary night walk. - means there is no proof or something against which we can validate. Weakener.

D. Majority of the people of Hyper are great believers of science and scientific research. - Strengthener.

E. Many people in Hyper village are in two minds when it comes to believing in theories about aliens and UFOs. - "Many" can be at least 2. If 2% are double-minded doesn't matter; if 100% are double-minded - weakener. Ambiguous

News Reporter: In the last five years, several residents of Hyper

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

News Reporter: In the last five years, several residents of Hyper

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards