Because the Gelrica temple, which attracts thousands of tourists every

Question

Because the Gelrica temple, which attracts thousands of tourists every month, was built using volcanic-composite rocks, its ruins are still fairly intact and in fair condition, considering their age. However, vibrations caused by the constant footsteps of visitors to the site are a major force behind the recent acceleration of its decomposition, significantly more damaging than acid rain and smog from the nearby metropolitan. There are currently no funds available to install protective systems at the site. Since the only funding for the ruins comes from entrance fees paid by visitors, the site's destruction seems inevitable.

The answer to which of the following would be most useful in evaluating the argument?

A. For how long would the site need to be closed in order to complete the installation process of the protective systems?

B. How much damage would be done to the site before sufficient funds could be raised to pay for the protective systems?

C. What would be an accurate estimation of the price for the installation of adequate protective systems at the site?

D. Is the source of the volcanic-composite rocks known?

E. What percentage of the overall damage is caused by the footsteps of tourists visiting the temple ruins?

This is a  CR Butler Question

Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Sentence Correction Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Integrated Reasoning Butler

AbhinavShah14 · Answer

IMO is B

Let us explain why it is B:

A. For how long would the site need to be closed in order to complete the installation process of the protective systems?  
This is irrevalant as no matter how much time it take for the protective system to install, there will be a lack of funds.

B. How much damage would be done to the site before sufficient funds could be raised to pay for the protective systems?  
This is revalant to evaluate the argument as it asks how much damage will be done before the funds are arranged. If less damage is done, then the destruction is not inevitable. If so much damage is done that there is no use of the protective system, destruction is inevitable.

C. What would be an accurate estimation of the price for the installation of adequate protective systems at the site?  
This is again irrevalant as whatever amount of price will be needed, it dosen't tell us that whether the destruction of the temple is inevitable or not.

D. Is the source of the volcanic-composite rocks known?  
Totally irrevalant, what will be done answering this question?

E. What percentage of the overall damage is caused by the footsteps of tourists visiting the temple ruins?  
This can be taken as an option, but when we see Option B, this feels irrevalant. As no matter how much damage is done, we don't know if the destruction of the temple is inevitable or not.

saugata64 · Answer

Option E cannot be correct because irrespective of the percentage of damage caused by tourists along with smog and acid rain, destruction seems inevitable without any protection system coming up.

Option B addresses exactly this issue by mentioning that even if a certain percentage of the ruins gets damaged, funds will be raised for to pay for a protection system.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

AbhinavShah14 · Answer

This explanation makes much more sense on how to eliminate E.

Posted from my mobile device

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Because the Gelrica temple, which attracts thousands of tourists every month, was built using volcanic-composite rocks, its ruins are still fairly intact and in fair condition, considering their age. However, vibrations caused by the constant footsteps of visitors to the site are a major force behind the recent acceleration of its decomposition, significantly more damaging than acid rain and smog from the nearby metropolitan. There are currently no funds available to install protective systems at the site. Since the only funding for the ruins comes from entrance fees paid by visitors, the site's destruction seems inevitable.

The answer to which of the following would be most useful in evaluating the argument?

A. For how long would the site need to be closed in order to complete the installation process of the protective systems?

Incorrect.

To solve this Investigation question, first break down the argument. The first three sentences are factual, i.e., premises. The first part of the last sentence is another premise while the second part uses the word seems which tells us it is not a premise, but instead a judgment, or because it's about the future, a prediction. Therefore, it's the argument's conclusion.

Premise: the Gelrica temple ruins are visited by thousands of tourists monthly
+
Premise: visitors' footsteps are the most damaging of the factors affecting the site
+
Premise: at present there are no funds to pay for systems that could protect the site
+
Premise: the site's budget is made up only from the profits it makes from visitors
=
Conclusion: it will not be long before the site is destroyed

Vital factor: ?

You are required to find the factor which is most crucial to the author's conclusion. The correct answer is a question which could support or weaken the conclusion depending on its answer.

Although this may seem like a practical question, it is definitely not the most useful of the answer choices. Since there is no apparent source for the funding of the protective systems, planning the closing of the site does not seem relevant.

B. How much damage would be done to the site before sufficient funds could be raised to pay for the protective systems?

This question could determine if the author's prediction was right. If the site continued to accept tourists but was destroyed before it could collect enough money to pay for the protective systems, then the author would be right. However, if the site sustained only limited damage before it could raise the necessary funds for the systems, then it could be saved.

C. What would be an accurate estimation of the price for the installation of adequate protective systems at the site?

Incorrect.

To solve this Investigation question, first break down the argument. The first three sentences are factual, i.e., premises. The first part of the last sentence is another premise while the second part uses the word seems which tells us it is not a premise, but instead a judgment, or because it's about the future, a prediction. Therefore, it's the argument's conclusion.

Premise: the Gelrica temple ruins are visited by thousands of tourists monthly
+
Premise: visitors' footsteps are the most damaging of the factors affecting the site
+
Premise: at present there are no funds to pay for systems that could protect the site
+
Premise: the site's budget is made up only from the profits it makes from visitors
=
Conclusion: it will not be long before the site is destroyed

Vital factor: ?

You are required to find the factor which is most crucial to the author's conclusion. The correct answer is a question which could support or weaken the conclusion depending on its answer.

Answering this question would not help us check the author's conclusion. We are already told that no funds are available so even if the protective systems cost $5, we cannot assume that this sum can be paid.

D. Is the source of the volcanic-composite rocks known?

Incorrect.

The argument deals with the destruction of the current ruins. Firstly, even if the source is known, we cannot be sure if there are still usable rocks there. Secondly, even if similar rocks can be found, we cannot assume that the site can be rebuilt.

E. What percentage of the overall damage is caused by the footsteps of tourists visiting the temple ruins?

Incorrect.

This question would not lead us to any useful information. We are told in the premises that the footsteps of the tourists are the major cause of the damage. The exact percentage of this damage is unimportant.

Because the Gelrica temple, which attracts thousands of tourists every

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

Because the Gelrica temple, which attracts thousands of tourists every

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