Even though there has been significant scientific debate for a long ti

Question

Even though there has been significant scientific debate for a long time on the misuse of fossil fuels, most scientists now agree that human activity is causing a rapid depletion of these resources. Though predictions vary, many fossil fuel experts believe that all the Earth’s fossil fuels will be consumed by the next century. Such an event would cause a global shut down of all the industries and equipments that use fossil fuels, disturbing habitat and resources for survival for billions of people.

Which of the following is an assumption in support of the argument’s conclusion?

A) New technological developments in the next century will not create a substitute for fossil fuels.
B) Individuals will not become more aware of the steps they can take to reduce the use of fossil fuels.
C) Global shutdown of industries and equipments that use fossil fuels will similarly affect all parts of the Earth.
D) Some fossil fuel experts predict that the fossil fuels will be completely depleted even earlier than during the next century. 
E) Human activity is the sole cause of depleting fossil fuels.

neha24 · Answer

my take A
the argument is based on complete exhaustion of fossil fuel so if A is negated then conclusion will fall apart 
B cannot be for even if people become aware then what is a guarantee that exhaustion of fossil fuel will stop !!

ratinarace · Answer

Premise  Even though there has been significant scientific debate for a long time on the misuse of fossil fuels, most scientists now agree that human activity is causing a rapid depletion of these resources.

Premise  Though predictions vary, many fossil fuel experts believe that all the Earth’s fossil fuels will be consumed by the next century.

Conclusion  Such an event would cause a global shut down of all the industries and equipments that use fossil fuels, disturbing habitat and resources for survival for billions of people.

Which of the following is an assumption in support of the argument’s conclusion?

A) New technological developments in the next century will not create a substitute for fossil fuels
 This argument defends the argument as an assumption....If we don't assume this we cannot derive a conclusion that " Such an event would cause a global shut down of all the industries and equipments that use fossil fuels, disturbing habitat and resources for survival for billions of people" 
B) Individuals will not become more aware of the steps they can take to reduce the use of fossil fuels.
  Doesn't affect the conclusion in any way  
C) Global shutdown of industries and equipments that use fossil fuels will similarly affect all parts of the Earth.
 Doesn't matter after we have reached the conclusion that there will global shutdown 
D) Some fossil fuel experts predict that the fossil fuels will be completely depleted even earlier than during the next century. 
 Doesn't matter after we have reached the conclusion that there will global shutdown 
E) Human activity is the sole cause of depleting fossil fuels.
 explicitly stated so this cannot be an assumption

SVaidyaraman · Answer

Premise:human activity is causing a rapid depletion of fossil fuels and all the Earth’s fossil fuels will be consumed by the next century
Conclusion: Such an event would cause a global shut down of all the industries and equipments that use fossil fuels, disturbing habitat and resources for survival for billions of people.

We need to look for the choice whose negation (i) is an additional premise which negates the conclusion or (ii) which reduces the force of the premise.

The negation of choice A which is "New technological developments in the next century  will create a substitute for fossil fuels." , is an additional premise which negates the conclusion.

None of the other choices does that. So choice A.

anish123ster · Answer

Correct answer is A.

A) New technological developments in the next century will not create a substitute for fossil fuels.  this is the correct assumption because if new substitutes are not created then, finally the fossil fuels will any how get over. 
B) Individuals will not become more aware of the steps they can take to REDUCED the use of fossil fuels.  Incorrect. Even if the fossil fuel consumption is reduced, the consumption will continue and will lead to its end. Best trap answer. note the word REDUCED. 
C) Global shutdown of industries and equipments that use fossil fuels will similarly affect all parts of the Earth.  Not relevent 
D) Some fossil fuel experts predict that the fossil fuels will be completely depleted even earlier than during the next century.  Not relevent  
E) Human activity is the sole cause of depleting fossil fuels.  directly stated from the premise. not an assumption.

Archit143 · Answer

Tons of kudos to you man....gr8 differentiation pointed out .....surely thats the hinge.....

Archit

Ivan91 · Answer

Chose A without even reading the other options. 34 seconds in total

))

Vercules · Answer

Hi Guys,

Updating the post with OA and OE.

The argument concludes that depletion of fossil fuels caused by human activity will shut down of all the industries and equipments that use fossil fuels, disturbing habitat and resources for survival for billions. Any assumption in support of this conclusion would have to corroborate that these events will definitively take place..

(A) New technological developments in the next century will not create a substitute for fossil fuels.

Correct. If new technological developments in the next century allow people to come up with an alternative for fossil fuels, then industries and equipment that use fossil fuels will not shut down. Thus, a necessary assumption is that these technologies will not be developed.

(B) Individuals will not become more aware of the steps they can take to reduce the use of fossil fuels.

A simple awareness of the steps to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels in no way undermines the argument’s conclusion, as this answer choice does not describe any action being taken by individuals.

(C) Global shutdown of industries and equipments that use fossil fuels will similarly affect all parts of the Earth.

The argument never suggests that all parts of the Earth will be similarly affected; this choice is too extreme and overreaching for the argument’s conclusion.

(D) Some fossil fuel experts predict that the fossil fuels will be completely depleted even earlier than during the next century.

This might be true, but it is not an assumption on which the conclusion rests. Instead, this answer choice is simply an inference that might be drawn from the premises. This a good example of a choice which can be true based on the stimulus but not actually a valid assumption.

(E) Human activity is the sole cause of depleting fossil fuels.

The idea that human activity is the sole cause of fossil fuel depletion is neither suggested nor assumed by the argument. In addition, the wording "sole cause" is too extreme.

skorada · Answer

Hello,

I have a question regarding the answer choices A and B
I selected B because my reasoning to reject B was as follows:
negate A and we get: New technological developments in the next century will create a substitute for fossil fuels.
My thought process: Even if substitutes were created we dont know if the current industries are equipped to work with the new substitutes for fossil fuels and they can still be closed down and based on this thought process I rejected A.

Although I do agree after reading the comments that B is the best answer. Have I taken my thought process too far when rejecting A?

Regards

Abhishek009 · Answer

The highlighted part in my opinion is far fetched reasoning..

Kritisood · Answer

GMATNinja  the conclusion is that "Such an event would cause a global shut down of all the industries and equipments that use fossil fuels,   disturbing habitat and resources for survival for billions of people .  "

when the conclusion says habitat and resources for survival for billions of people will be disturbed by shutting down all the industries and equipments that use fossil fuels, my understanding was that this implication would be towards people who work in such industries and of course the rest of the world.

in A, even if new technological developments in the next century create a substitute for fossil fuels how can we  assume that this new tech will also recreate the habitat and jobs for the people who lost them cus of shut down of the fossil industry?

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Even though there has been significant scientific debate for a long ti

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

Even though there has been significant scientific debate for a long ti

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