Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 23:12 It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 23:12
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
655-705 (Hard)|   Conclusion|      
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,802
Own Kudos:
810,894
 [6]
Given Kudos: 105,868
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,802
Kudos: 810,894
 [6]
A prominent statesman in Country X has recently claimed that the incre 05 Dec 2023, 02:30
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

61% (02:01) correct 39% (02:14) wrong based on 309 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
A prominent statesman in Country X has recently claimed that the increased amount of recycling indicates that Country X's natural resources are no longer diminishing and that the amount of waste is no longer increasing. This specious argument is as illogical as it would be to assert that the ever increasing rate at which rain forests are being cut down demonstrates a lack of danger to that resource. The real cause of the increased amount of recycling is an increase in overall consumption, including that of recyclable materials such as paper and plastic.

The above argument, if true, best supports which of the following as a conclusion?

A. The statesman's claim is a deliberate fallacy intended to promote his political interests.

B. Country X recycles 100% of the waste generated by its population and industries.

C. Country X's natural resources continue to diminish and the amount of waste continues to grow.

D. Recycling is the reason for the increasing consumption of recyclable materials in Country X.

E. The more waste Country X's population and industry generate, the more rain forests need to be cut down.


ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
C
User avatar
Tukkebaaz
User avatar
Joined: 30 Apr 2023
Last visit: 27 Jun 2024
Posts: 134
Own Kudos:
69
 [1]
Given Kudos: 72
Status:A man of Focus, Commitment and Shear Will
Location: India
Schools: Fuqua '26 (A$) Rotman '26 (A$) Ivey (A$$) Goizueta '26 (S)
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
WE:Investment Banking (Finance: Investment Banking)
Schools: Fuqua '26 (A$) Rotman '26 (A$) Ivey (A$$) Goizueta '26 (S)
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
Posts: 134
Kudos: 69
 [1]
A prominent statesman in Country X has recently claimed that the incre 07 Dec 2023, 01:15
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A prominent statesman in Country X has recently claimed that the increased amount of recycling indicates that Country X's natural resources are no longer diminishing and that the amount of waste is no longer increasing. This specious argument is as illogical as it would be to assert that the ever increasing rate at which rain forests are being cut down demonstrates a lack of danger to that resource. The real cause of the increased amount of recycling is an increase in overall consumption, including that of recyclable materials such as paper and plastic.

The above argument, if true, best supports which of the following as a conclusion?

Right off the bat this one seems fairly straightforward despite the convoluted language. Focusing on the Bold parts.

As we look through lets see which of the following is in line with what we have i.e. I should be able to confidently say yes this is true as per the passage. If "it may be true" then its not a conclusion.

A. The statesman's claim is a deliberate fallacy intended to promote his political interests. Cant talk about his reason of why he said something

B. Country X recycles 100% of the waste generated by its population and industries. Cant say they do 100%

C. Country X's natural resources continue to diminish and the amount of waste continues to grow. Yes, seems fair as per what we have.

D. Recycling is the reason for the increasing consumption of recyclable materials in Country X. We dont know the cause.

E. The more waste Country X's population and industry generate, the more rain forests need to be cut down. Tempting? not really. We cant say this either, maybe they achieve some sort of equilibrium or not. So cant say.

Hope this helps :)
User avatar
samarpan.g28
User avatar
Joined: 08 Dec 2023
Last visit: 18 Feb 2026
Posts: 315
Own Kudos:
136
Given Kudos: 1,236
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Human Resources
Schools: IIMA '26 Schulich Sept '26 Montreal '26 HEC Sept '26
GPA: 8.88
WE:Engineering (Technology)
Schools: IIMA '26 Schulich Sept '26 Montreal '26 HEC Sept '26
Posts: 315
Kudos: 136
A prominent statesman in Country X has recently claimed that the incre 25 Dec 2023, 10:06
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can someone please help me understand, where, in the passage is indicated that diminishing natural resources has a direct relationship with the growing amount of waste as stated in option C? I selected option B, but I understand it is too extreme to conclude an exact 100% recycling.
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,802
Own Kudos:
810,894
Given Kudos: 105,868
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,802
Kudos: 810,894
A prominent statesman in Country X has recently claimed that the incre 06 Jan 2024, 07:45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION



A prominent statesman in Country X has recently claimed that the increased amount of recycling indicates that Country X's natural resources are no longer diminishing and that the amount of waste is no longer increasing. This specious argument is as illogical as it would be to assert that the ever increasing rate at which rain forests are being cut down demonstrates a lack of danger to that resource. The real cause of the increased amount of recycling is an increase in overall consumption, including that of recyclable materials such as paper and plastic.

The above argument, if true, best supports which of the following as a conclusion?


A. The statesman's claim is a deliberate fallacy intended to promote his political interests.

Incorrect.

This is an Inference question, so the argument is comprised of premises only, on which basis you are asked to draw a conclusion; in addition, the first premise in this question report of someone's argument, so the question contains an argument within an argument:

    Premise A: a statesman claimed increased recycling indicates that natural resources are not used and no more waste is produced
    +
    Premise B: this claim is as illogical as claiming cutting down more trees means no danger to rainforests
    +
    Premise C: the real cause for increased recycling is greater consumption
    =
    Conclusion: ?

Do not be fooled by this unique structure. You are asked to draw a conclusion based on what data you have in these three premises - and nothing else!

None of the premises describe the intentions of the statesman, so accepting this answer choice as the argument's conclusion requires further assumptions (for example, that the statesman would benefit somehow from his claim).

Remember that the correct answer to an Inference question must take only a small step beyond what is stated in the argument.


B. Country X recycles 100% of the waste generated by its population and industries.

Incorrect.

Premise A tells us what the statesman claimed; Premise B tells us what was said was illogical. Therefore, combining the premises would not yield a conclusion which agrees with the statesman, as this answer choice does.


C. Country X's natural resources continue to diminish and the amount of waste continues to grow.

Premises A and B report what the statesman said and contradict it. Premise C indicates the consumption has risen, which means natural resources diminish and more waste is produced.


D. Recycling is the reason for the increasing consumption of recyclable materials in Country X.

Incorrect.

This is an Inference question, so the argument is comprised of premises only, on which basis you are asked to draw a conclusion; in addition, the first premise in this question report of someone's argument, so the question contains an argument within an argument:

    Premise A: a statesman claimed increased recycling indicates that natural resources are not used and no more waste is produced
    +
    Premise B: this claim is as illogical as claiming cutting down more trees means no danger to rainforests
    +
    Premise C: the real cause for increased recycling is greater consumption
    =
    Conclusion: ?

Do not be fooled by this unique structure. You are asked to draw a conclusion based on what data you have in these three premises - and nothing else!

Premise C tells us that greater consumption is the reason for increased recycling, not the other way around, so there is no basis for concluding the opposite.


E. The more waste Country X's population and industry generate, the more rain forests need to be cut down.

Incorrect.

This answer choice attempts to connect two concepts that were mentioned in different parts of the argument: waste and rain forests. However, rain forests were only mentioned by the argument's author as an analogy meant to illustrate the fallacy of the statesman's claim.

The premises do not imply a direct relation between waste and rain forests.
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
AbhishekP220108
501 posts
bhanu29
358 posts