It is currently 19 Oct 2017, 17:29

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Jun 2010
Posts: 358

Kudos [?]: 453 [0], given: 50

Schools: IE'14, ISB'14, Kellogg'15
WE 1: 7 Yrs in Automobile (Commercial Vehicle industry)
Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2012, 21:49
IMO D. We can not conclude what is written in B. Rate of decrease in natural habitat is not compared anywhere in passage.
As mentioned in D "in short term" correctly encapsulate the current situation of cheetah in African grassland.
_________________

Regards
SD
-----------------------------
Press Kudos if you like my post.
Debrief 610-540-580-710(Long Journey): http://gmatclub.com/forum/from-600-540-580-710-finally-achieved-in-4th-attempt-142456.html

Kudos [?]: 453 [0], given: 50

Manager
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 71

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 26

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT Date: 09-28-2012
WE: Accounting (Manufacturing)
Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2012, 15:41
joshnsit wrote:
arijitb1980 wrote:
Hello Don,
Can you please explain why did you choose D ? My answer is ''(B) The cheetah's natural habitat is decreasing in size at a faster rate than is the size of the wild cheetah population'' which is true based on the evidence in the last line "However,there is not enough African grassland to support a wild cheetah population larger...".Please suggest where I am mistaken.
First of all, this is a "Find the conclusion" and not strengthen question. You should be able to derive conclusion given in the correct option from the premises.
If it is strengthen question, choice B is correct.

Now, let us look into B to derive conclusion. Rate is change(wrt time or other quantity) of quantity. B specifically talks about rate(change wrt time) of natural habitat(No) and rate(change wrt time) of cheetah population(Yes).
Do premises talk about rate(change) of cheetah population? Yes
Earlier : Previous estimates of the size that the wild cheetah population must be in order for these animals to suwive a natural disaster in the African grasslands region were too small. [Note that here it is population size which is small and not the grassland region. It is more of SC than CR here ]
After : and the current population barely meets the previous estimates
So the change of population is almost zero, so the rate of population change will be zero wrt time. and unknown wrt grassland region....

Now, let us talk about change of habitat wrt time or population. Do premises talk about this rate? No
So B can not be concluded

Let us see what premises say:
Earlier: Previous estimates of population was so small that it would wipe out species if natural disaster would have come.
After : Population is more or less same now.
Conclusion: Since, population is same(and other factors same), population will be wiped out if natural disaster will come in today's date and circumstances. That is what is the relevance of phrase "In the short term" in choice D actually.
This is what D says.
HTH

Hi Mate

I chose the answer as A. Perhaps my comprehension is very poor. I would write my reasoning here:-

Previous estimate about the size of pop was small - To me it means that someone estimated that on an area of say 1000 acres, only 100 can survive a natural disaster, but actually it was quite a lot more, say 200 (ratio land:pop = 5:1). But now, the population has come down to below 100 say 50 (Cuz the current pop barely meets the previous estimates). But the grassland has also reduced and cannot support even 50. So, the land size must have come down to below 250 (less than the ratio 0f 5:1).
But does this mean that in future, any disaster will not be survived by the cheetahs? Wot if the pop of cheetahs decreases further? Then the land will take care..
So only the estimates were inaccurate. And yes, by my technique, I can also say that the land size has reduced faster than the pop (pop - came down 4 times, but land came down by more than 4 times)...So even B is right for me.

Please help me, I think my comprehension has some flaw which I need to correct. I have been making mistakes on all the 700+ level questions.

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 26

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 412

Kudos [?]: 342 [0], given: 34

Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2012, 19:24
talismaaniac wrote:
joshnsit wrote:
arijitb1980 wrote:
Hello Don,
Can you please explain why did you choose D ? My answer is ''(B) The cheetah's natural habitat is decreasing in size at a faster rate than is the size of the wild cheetah population'' which is true based on the evidence in the last line "However,there is not enough African grassland to support a wild cheetah population larger...".Please suggest where I am mistaken.
First of all, this is a "Find the conclusion" and not strengthen question. You should be able to derive conclusion given in the correct option from the premises.
If it is strengthen question, choice B is correct.

Now, let us look into B to derive conclusion. Rate is change(wrt time or other quantity) of quantity. B specifically talks about rate(change wrt time) of natural habitat(No) and rate(change wrt time) of cheetah population(Yes).
Do premises talk about rate(change) of cheetah population? Yes
Earlier : Previous estimates of the size that the wild cheetah population must be in order for these animals to suwive a natural disaster in the African grasslands region were too small. [Note that here it is population size which is small and not the grassland region. It is more of SC than CR here ]
After : and the current population barely meets the previous estimates
So the change of population is almost zero, so the rate of population change will be zero wrt time. and unknown wrt grassland region....

Now, let us talk about change of habitat wrt time or population. Do premises talk about this rate? No
So B can not be concluded

Let us see what premises say:
Earlier: Previous estimates of population was so small that it would wipe out species if natural disaster would have come.
After : Population is more or less same now.
Conclusion: Since, population is same(and other factors same), population will be wiped out if natural disaster will come in today's date and circumstances. That is what is the relevance of phrase "In the short term" in choice D actually.
This is what D says.
HTH
Hi Mate
I chose the answer as A. Perhaps my comprehension is very poor. I would write my reasoning here:-
Previous estimate about the size of pop was small - To me it means that someone estimated that on an area of say 1000 acres, only 100 can survive a natural disaster, but actually it was quite a lot more, say 200 (ratio land:pop = 5:1). But now, the population has come down to below 100 say 50 (Cuz the current pop barely meets the previous estimates). But the grassland has also reduced and cannot support even 50. So, the land size must have come down to below 250 (less than the ratio 0f 5:1).
But does this mean that in future, any disaster will not be survived by the cheetahs? Wot if the pop of cheetahs decreases further? Then the land will take care..
So only the estimates were inaccurate. And yes, by my technique, I can also say that the land size has reduced faster than the pop (pop - came down 4 times, but land came down by more than 4 times)...So even B is right for me.

Please help me, I think my comprehension has some flaw which I need to correct. I have been making mistakes on all the 700+ level questions.
@talismaaniac, Let's pull the straws of this problem one by one.
Statement 1: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands.
Statement 2: Previous estimates of the size(say 100 cheetahs as you said)that the wild cheetah population must be in order for these animals to survive a natural disaster in the African grasslands region were too small, ==> This statement has a conditional[If {unhighlighted part}, then {highlighted part}], which says that if the cheetahs have to survive a natural disaster in the grasslands, then number of 100 cheetahs is too small . But, nowhere it is told that without natural disaster, cheetahs will not survive. So, in one possibility that natural disaster doesnt come, cheetahs will survive.
Statement 3: the current population barely meets the previous estimates. => The currently population may be 99 or 100 cheetahs if it barely meets previous estimates, which was 100 cheetahs as per our first assumption.
Statement 4:At present, however, there is not enough African grassland to support a wild cheetah population larger than the current population.==> This statement says that size of grassland says that it will support 100 cheetahs but not 101 cheetahs, because it will not support any thing larger than current population(100 cheetahs)

Let us take what can be concluded from above statements:
(A) Previous estimates of the size of the existing wild cheetah population were inaccurate.-- Our initial estimate of 100 cheetahs is still valid. So, wrong statement.
(B) The cheetah's natural habitat is decreasing in size at a faster rate than is the size of the wild cheetah population. -- The size of cheetah's natural habitat has bearing on cheetah's survival in a very specific case that a natural disaster occur. If that happens, cheetah's population will be zero. But, this option doesnt cover other option in which natural disaster doesn't happen as per statement 2. Moreover, statement 4 can mean that current grassland can support 100 cheetahs. So, this statement is not true in every case, so cant be a conclusion.
(D) In the short term, the wild cheetah population will be incapable of surviving a natural disaster in the African grasslands. -- In short term, the grassland area and the population cant be altered phenomenally (This is in accordance to various economic theories ). This answer statement is actually a rephrase of conditional in statement 2.
_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Kudos [?]: 342 [0], given: 34

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 519

Kudos [?]: 335 [0], given: 269

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2012, 20:51
+1 D

(A) Previous estimates of the size of the existing wild cheetah population were inaccurate. (There is no mention of error in the previous estimate, eliminate)
(B) The cheetah's natural habitat is decreasing in size at a faster rate than is the size of the wild cheetah population. (Again, natural habitat is already less and not decreasing, eliminate)
(C) The principal threat to the endangered wild cheetah population is neither pollution nor hunting, but a natural disaster. (It is a comprehension which signifies natural disaster, we do not know about other dangers, out of scope, eliminate)
(D) In the short term, the wild cheetah population will be incapable of surviving a natural disaster in the African grasslands. (This can be concluded from the premise, since the grassland is not enough to support more cheetahs and the existing number of cheetahs are too small to overcome a natural disaster, thus our answer)
(E) In regions where land is suitable for cheetah habitation, more natural disasters are expected to occur during the next decade than occurred during the past decade. (Out of scope, new information, eliminate)

_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Kudos [?]: 335 [0], given: 269

Intern
Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 41

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 28

Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Sep 2012, 00:37
Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous estimates of the size that the wild cheetah population must be in order for these animals to survive a natural disaster in the African grasslands region were too small, and the current population barely meets the previous estimates, At present, however, there is not enough African grassland to support a wild cheetah population larger than the current population.
The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of the following conclusions?
(A) Previous estimates of the size of the existing wild cheetah population were inaccurate.
(B) The cheetah's natural habitat is decreasing in size at a faster rate than is the size of the wild cheetah population.
(C) The principal threat to the endangered wild cheetah population is neither pollution nor hunting, but a natural disaster.
(D) In the short term, the wild cheetah population will be incapable of surviving a natural disaster in the African grasslands.
(E) In regions where land is suitable for cheetah habitation, more natural disasters are expected to occur during the next decade than occurred during the past decade.

(A) Out of scope, we are only told that previous estimates of critical mass were too low.
(B) This is not mentioned in the passage at all! It may sound good if there was a real world behind this problem but you must take the information at face value and not let the real world cloud your judgement. Furthermore if you look at the argument this is not the correct conclusion

-previous est at critical mass was too low
-cheetah pop hasnt grown.
Therefore....likely that cheetah pop is actually below critical mass - so incapable of survival.

I skipped and went straight to D here, C and E are both out of scope
_________________

If you find my post helpful, please GIVE ME SOME KUDOS!

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 28

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 519

Kudos [?]: 335 [0], given: 269

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Sep 2012, 20:16
arnivorous wrote:
joshnsit wrote:
Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous estimates of the size that the wild cheetah population must be in order for these animals to survive a natural disaster in the African grasslands region were too small, and the current population barely meets the previous estimates, At present, however, there is not enough African grassland to support a wild cheetah population larger than the current population.
The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of the following conclusions?
(A) Previous estimates of the size of the existing wild cheetah population were inaccurate. opposite answer
(B) The cheetah's natural habitat is decreasing in size at a faster rate than is the size of the wild cheetah population.out of scope
(C) The principal threat to the endangered wild cheetah population is neither pollution nor hunting, but a natural disaster. out of scope
(D) In the short term, the wild cheetah population will be incapable of surviving a natural disaster in the African grasslands. Correct answer. The current population size does not meet the population size required to survive a natural disaster. At the present, there is not enough African grassland to support a larger population. Conclusion: The current population is incapable of surviving a natural disaster.
(E) In regions where land is suitable for cheetah habitation, more natural disasters are expected to occur during the next decade than occurred during the past decade.out of scope

Please comment your reasons while giving answer options. I will come back with OA once I get some correct reasoning flowing in.
Also, let me know which kind of question type this question is...

Power Score CR will call it "Most Supported" or "Must be True" type

_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Kudos [?]: 335 [0], given: 269

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7674

Kudos [?]: 17361 [4], given: 232

Location: Pune, India
Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2012, 20:03
4
KUDOS
Expert's post
joshnsit wrote:
Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous estimates of the size that the wild cheetah population must be in order for these animals to survive a natural disaster in the African grasslands region were too small, and the current population barely meets the previous estimates, At present, however, there is not enough African grassland to support a wild cheetah population larger than the current population.
The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of the following conclusions?
(A) Previous estimates of the size of the existing wild cheetah population were inaccurate.
(B) The cheetah's natural habitat is decreasing in size at a faster rate than is the size of the wild cheetah population.
(C) The principal threat to the endangered wild cheetah population is neither pollution nor hunting, but a natural disaster.
(D) In the short term, the wild cheetah population will be incapable of surviving a natural disaster in the African grasslands.
(E) In regions where land is suitable for cheetah habitation, more natural disasters are expected to occur during the next decade than occurred during the past decade.

Please comment your reasons while giving answer options. I will come back with OA once I get some correct reasoning flowing in.
Also, let me know which kind of question type this question is...

You should try to think ahead of what you are expecting from your answer option.

Look at the argument:
Previous estimates of 'cheetah population required to survive a natural disaster' were too small. (e.g. Previous estimate - if there are 100 cheetahs, they can survive a natural disaster. This estimate is too small. You perhaps need at least 200 to survive a natural disaster)
The current population barely meets the previous estimates. (The current pop is barely 100)
At present there is not enough African grassland to support a wild cheetah population larger than the current population. (So the population can't increase in the short term)

What can you say from this? What does this lead to?

That in the short term, if there is a natural disaster, the cheetahs probably will not survive it. (Option D)

(A) Previous estimates of the size of the existing wild cheetah population were inaccurate.
No. Previous estimates of 'cheetah population required to survive a natural disaster' were inaccurate. Not the estimates of current cheetah population.

(B) The cheetah's natural habitat is decreasing in size at a faster rate than is the size of the wild cheetah population.
The argument doesn't say that the natural habitat is decreasing. It only says that at present, it cannot increase. The rate of increase/decrease is anyway out of question.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17361 [4], given: 232

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Aug 2011
Posts: 390

Kudos [?]: 234 [0], given: 82

Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2012, 00:23
Thank u karishma..realy nice explanation ..

I seleceted A and b..

but after looking at ur explanation..i can say ..yup its D..
_________________

Bole So Nehal.. Sat Siri Akal.. Waheguru ji help me to get 700+ score !

Kudos [?]: 234 [0], given: 82

BSchool Forum Moderator
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 556

Kudos [?]: 971 [1], given: 321

GPA: 3.4
WE: General Management (Non-Profit and Government)
Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2013, 05:43
1
KUDOS

Kudos [?]: 971 [1], given: 321

BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 888

Kudos [?]: 718 [2], given: 44

Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jul 2014, 08:09
2
KUDOS
11
This post was
BOOKMARKED
This is my new project: Renew Old Thread => Back to basic => Just try It and give your reasoning
The topic will be sticky for 2 days from starting

Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous estimates of the size that the wild cheetah population must be in order for these animals to survive a natural disaster in the African grasslands region were too small, and the current population barely meets the previous estimates, At present, however, there is not enough African grassland to support a wild cheetah population larger than the current population.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of the following conclusions?

(A) Previous estimates of the size of the existing wild cheetah population were inaccurate.
(B) The cheetah's natural habitat is decreasing in size at a faster rate than is the size of the wild cheetah population.
(C) The principal threat to the endangered wild cheetah population is neither pollution nor hunting, but a natural disaster.
(D) In the short term, the wild cheetah population will be incapable of surviving a natural disaster in the African grasslands.
(E) In regions where land is suitable for cheetah habitation, more natural disasters are expected to occur during the next decade than occurred during the past decade.
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Kudos [?]: 718 [2], given: 44

Intern
Joined: 16 Dec 2013
Posts: 3

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 11

Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2014, 10:28
if D is the answer can someone please explain how the passage supports the claim that the size of grassland and cheetah population is not increasing, the passage doesn't give any information on the trend
_________________

Imagination is more important than knowledge - Albert Einstein

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 11

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1127

Kudos [?]: 3478 [6], given: 123

Location: United States
Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2014, 14:41
6
KUDOS
if D is the answer can someone please explain how the passage supports the claim that the size of grassland and cheetah population is not increasing, the passage doesn't give any information on the trend

I'm glad to help.

THEORIES:
Conclusion question.
Must pass the “Fact test”. Do not infer too far, just stick to premises.
Must show the main point, not just repeat the premises.
Pass the fact test, but only rephrase the premises (repeat one, two premises or combination of premises)
Out of scope or infer too far (not pass the fact test).

STIMULUS:
Fact 1: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Necessary condition.
Fact 2: Previous estimates of the size that the wild cheetah population must be in order for these animals to survive a natural disaster in the African grasslands region were too small. FACT
Fact 3: The current population barely meets the previous estimates. FACT
Fact 4: At present there is not enough African grassland to support a wild cheetah population larger than the current population. --> Necessary condition is not met.

ANALYZE THE STIMULUS:
Fact 2 means previous cheetah population needed to survive a natural disaster was too small.
Fact 3 means the current cheetah population is even smaller that that in the past. It means the current cheetah population is not enough to survive a natural disaster.
Fact 4 means the current cheetah population can’t become larger because there is not enough African grassland. Fact 4 clearly states that the cheetah population is not increasing, at least in the short term.

Combine fact 2, 3, 4 we can say that in the short term, the wild cheetah population will be incapable of surviving a natural disaster in the African grasslands.

Thus, D is correct.

Hope it’s clear.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Kudos [?]: 3478 [6], given: 123

Intern
Joined: 02 Aug 2014
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: 3 [1], given: 2

Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2014, 23:19
1
KUDOS
It not an easy task to get to the right conclusion here, thanks to the wordy premises
Facts and premises are explained well in above post. I will go for an example case

from the 1st statement it is clear that though Cheetahs population was less, the grassland area was good enough,if not great.

Case1; in 10 sqkm area there are 20 cheetahs. Natural disaster-->very low chances that many cheetahs getting effected, but still the effect is huge as population is less.

Case2: Huge reduction in grassland area: 5 sqkm existing. Chettahs-16 (less than earlier 20)
But here if natural disaster occurs, more cheetahs will get affected as they are confined in less area to save their lives. and at the same time more cheetah's are influenced by the disaster coz of limitations.

So I went with D as it brings out this case

If it is not clear, plz let me know, i will try up presenting in a better way.

Kudos [?]: 3 [1], given: 2

Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 114

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 118

Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Aug 2014, 08:30
Okay what I don't understand is the use of the words in the short term . Let me explain:-
We already know that the previous estimates were wrong and way too small to survive a natural disaster. We also know that the current population barely meets the previous estimates. Thus, we can infer that today, the current population is incapable of surviving a natural disaster. So why the use of in the short term. These words were the only I reason I discounted this statement

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 118

EMPOWERgmat Instructor
Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Aug 2014, 11:04
mahendru1992 wrote:
Okay what I don't understand is the use of the words in the short term . Let me explain:-
We already know that the previous estimates were wrong and way too small to survive a natural disaster. We also know that the current population barely meets the previous estimates. Thus, we can infer that today, the current population is incapable of surviving a natural disaster. So why the use of in the short term. These words were the only I reason I discounted this statement

Hi mahendru1992,

Happy to help. What you're doing is saying that the information in the prompt supports the idea that the Wild Cheetah won't survive a natural disaster beyond just in the short-term. So how is it that we can only infer that its short-term?

The distinction comes down to knowing EXACTLY what this question is asking for. This is an inference question, which means we're asked to find an answer that HAS TO BE TRUE.

It comes down to this: just ask yourself, "do we know for sure that the Wild Cheetah population is incapable of surviving a natural disaster in the short-term?" If you're thinking the incapability is even further than short-term, than the answer to this question would HAVE TO BE: YES!

To use a different example to demonstrate the exact same logic why D has to be right: let's say we know that somebody ran at least 10 miles. Do we know that the person ran at least 1 mile? Yes. Same exact logic. If the data supports a greater range, you can infer a smaller part of that range.
_________________

Allen T.
http://www.empowergmat.com

EMPOWERgmat GMAT Club Page, Study Plans, & Discounts

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 114

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 118

Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Aug 2014, 11:12
AllenEMPOWERgmat wrote:
mahendru1992 wrote:
Okay what I don't understand is the use of the words in the short term . Let me explain:-
We already know that the previous estimates were wrong and way too small to survive a natural disaster. We also know that the current population barely meets the previous estimates. Thus, we can infer that today, the current population is incapable of surviving a natural disaster. So why the use of in the short term. These words were the only I reason I discounted this statement

Hi mahendru1992,

Happy to help. What you're doing is saying that the information in the prompt supports the idea that the Wild Cheetah won't survive a natural disaster beyond just in the short-term. So how is it that we can only infer that its short-term?

The distinction comes down to knowing EXACTLY what this question is asking for. This is an inference question, which means we're asked to find an answer that HAS TO BE TRUE.

It comes down to this: just ask yourself, "do we know for sure that the Wild Cheetah population is incapable of surviving a natural disaster in the short-term?" If you're thinking the incapability is even further than short-term, than the answer to this question would HAVE TO BE: YES!

To use a different example to demonstrate the exact same logic why D has to be right: let's say we know that somebody ran at least 10 miles. Do we know that the person ran at least 1 mile? Yes. Same exact logic. If the data supports a greater range, you can infer a smaller part of that range.

Thanks for answering allenempowergmat
But if we do take a parallel example, shouldn't the analogy be if the person ran atleast 1 mile, could he have ran 10 miles? And the answer is of course he couldn't or maybe he did, but we don't know for sure.

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 118

EMPOWERgmat Instructor
Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Aug 2014, 11:20
mahendru1992 wrote:
AllenEMPOWERgmat wrote:
mahendru1992 wrote:
Okay what I don't understand is the use of the words in the short term . Let me explain:-
We already know that the previous estimates were wrong and way too small to survive a natural disaster. We also know that the current population barely meets the previous estimates. Thus, we can infer that today, the current population is incapable of surviving a natural disaster. So why the use of in the short term. These words were the only I reason I discounted this statement

Hi mahendru1992,

Happy to help. What you're doing is saying that the information in the prompt supports the idea that the Wild Cheetah won't survive a natural disaster beyond just in the short-term. So how is it that we can only infer that its short-term?

The distinction comes down to knowing EXACTLY what this question is asking for. This is an inference question, which means we're asked to find an answer that HAS TO BE TRUE.

It comes down to this: just ask yourself, "do we know for sure that the Wild Cheetah population is incapable of surviving a natural disaster in the short-term?" If you're thinking the incapability is even further than short-term, than the answer to this question would HAVE TO BE: YES!

To use a different example to demonstrate the exact same logic why D has to be right: let's say we know that somebody ran at least 10 miles. Do we know that the person ran at least 1 mile? Yes. Same exact logic. If the data supports a greater range, you can infer a smaller part of that range.

Thanks for answering allenempowergmat
But if we do take a parallel example, shouldn't the analogy be if the person ran atleast 1 mile, could he have ran 10 miles? And the answer is of course he couldn't or maybe he did, but we don't know for sure.

Hi mahendru1992,

I think you may have mis-read. The fact was that he ran AT LEAST 10 miles. If he ran at least 10 miles, do we know that he ran at least 1? Of course. See the distinction?
_________________

Allen T.
http://www.empowergmat.com

EMPOWERgmat GMAT Club Page, Study Plans, & Discounts

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 114

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 118

Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2014, 00:40
AllenEMPOWERgmat wrote:

Hi mahendru1992,

I think you may have mis-read. The fact was that he ran AT LEAST 10 miles. If he ran at least 10 miles, do we know that he ran at least 1? Of course. See the distinction?

Hi, sorry for troubling you, but I don't get it.
Okay, so what you mean is that if in the short term we know that the cheetah population wouldn't survive, then it's obvious that we know that the population wouldn't survive today per se. Am I right?
But what I'm trying to say is that the argument says that today we know that the population wouldn't survive a natural disaster but we don't know anything about the future, even if it's a short one. I mean what if some restoration process occurs which helps in increasing the population or what if they bring other cheetahs from other countries or reserves. This doesn't make sense for a short term, but i'm sure there are other 'what ifs' that do qualify. Don't you think we're assuming too much?
Thanks for bearing with me

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 118

EMPOWERgmat Instructor
Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: 24 [1], given: 0

Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2014, 10:43
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
mahendru1992 wrote:
AllenEMPOWERgmat wrote:

Hi mahendru1992,

I think you may have mis-read. The fact was that he ran AT LEAST 10 miles. If he ran at least 10 miles, do we know that he ran at least 1? Of course. See the distinction?

Hi, sorry for troubling you, but I don't get it.
Okay, so what you mean is that if in the short term we know that the cheetah population wouldn't survive, then it's obvious that we know that the population wouldn't survive today per se. Am I right?
But what I'm trying to say is that the argument says that today we know that the population wouldn't survive a natural disaster but we don't know anything about the future, even if it's a short one. I mean what if some restoration process occurs which helps in increasing the population or what if they bring other cheetahs from other countries or reserves. This doesn't make sense for a short term, but i'm sure there are other 'what ifs' that do qualify. Don't you think we're assuming too much?
Thanks for bearing with me

Hi mahendru1992,

No trouble at all. Let's lay out all of the facts once more, and you'll see how this goes beyond JUST the present moment:

Previous estimates of the cheetah to survive a natural disaster in the African grasslands region were too small. That means we know the number needs to be bigger.
The current population barely meets the previous estimates. That means that the current population is WAY below what it needs to survive if it doesn't meet the previous estimates which were already too low.
At present, there is not enough African grassland to support a wild cheetah population larger than the current population. This tells us that there is not even enough grassland to support a population any bigger than it is today.

Given those facts, is there any way the wild cheetah could survive a natural disaster of the short-term (say the next few months, maybe even a year?). No way. That's why D has to be right.

I think that the source of your doubt has to do with your definition of short-term. If you were thinking of it as something on the order of say 2-5 years, then, you're right, we can't infer that.
_________________

Allen T.
http://www.empowergmat.com

EMPOWERgmat GMAT Club Page, Study Plans, & Discounts

Kudos [?]: 24 [1], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 23 Jan 2012
Posts: 75

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 40

Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2014, 18:06
I see what you pointing at, but I am not sure whether we can jump to this conclusion. I don't understand what part of the premise says that for sure in short term the tigers will not survive a natural disaster if there is any. Maybe I am missing a point.

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 40

Re: Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands   [#permalink] 29 Oct 2014, 18:06

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 53 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Wild cheetahs live in the African grasslands. Previous

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.