Novice bird-watcher: I don’t know much about animal track’s

Question

Novice bird-watcher: I don’t know much about animal track’s, but I do know that birds typically have four toes, and most birds have three toes pointing forward and one toe pointing backward. Since this track was made by an animal with four toes of which three point forward and one points backward, we can conclude it was made by some kind of bird.

The argument is flawed because it

(A) relies on the vagueness of the term “track”
(B) does not define birds as animals with four toes
(C) fails to identify what kind of bird might have made the track
(D) does not establish that only a bird could have made the track
(E) depends on evidence about an individual bird rather than about birds in general

VKat · Answer

hello expert,

if option d is correct, why we want to establish that "only a bird has made the track "?

goforgmat · Answer

We don't want to establish that. there can be more than one way of making tracks like that perhaps by different animals,insects(just saying)
This is an example of a classic flaw question.
Whenever there is an argument which shows that there is only one way of dung something ,the correct flaw answer will be to find an option that shatters that assumption.

abhishekdadarwal2009 · Answer

Novice bird-watcher: I don’t know much about animal track’s, but I do know that birds typically have four toes, and most birds have three toes pointing forward and one toe pointing backward. Since this track was made by an animal with four toes of which three point forward and one points backward, we can conclude it was made by some kind of bird.

The argument is flawed because it

(A) relies on the vagueness of the term “track”
 Out of scope. 
(B) does not define birds as animals with four toes
 Not the main flaw. 
(C) fails to identify what kind of bird might have made the track
 type of bird is out of scope. 
(D) does not establish that only a bird could have made the track
 Any other animal could have made the track as the argument fails to specify that only birds have four toes. 
(E) depends on evidence about an individual bird rather than about birds in general
 out of scope.

RohitSaluja · Answer

Not an expert but here are my two cents. Assume there are animals having 4 toes, the current conclusion could potentially be weakened by arguing that it could also have been any other animal, but if the argument establishes that only birds could make a track, then the conclusion becomes sound proof as no one else would be able to make the track. Hence the answer

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.

Novice bird-watcher: I don’t know much about animal track’s

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Novice bird-watcher: I don’t know much about animal track’s

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