Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 27 May 2017, 20:28

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

Zoologists warn of an imminent surge in the number of animal

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 25 May 2006
Posts: 227
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 65 [0], given: 0

Zoologists warn of an imminent surge in the number of animal [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 10:47
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 3 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Zoologists warn of an imminent surge in the number of animal species that will become extinct within this century. They caution that the rate of extinction will only increase. They are wrong, however. One need only consider the information gathered on insects: 47 species of North American insect vanished between 1900 and 1950, but only 23 species of such insects became extinct between 1950 and 2000.

The answer to which of the following questions provides information that would be most helpful in evaluating the argument above?

A. How many species of non-native insect species have been introduced into North America since 1950?
B. Has any special effort been made to save North American insect species?
C. How many years' experience do the zoologists have in evaluating patterns of extinction among animals?
D. Are insects susceptible to the same causes of extinction as are mammals?
E. How many acres of woodland are set aside each year as wildlife refuges?
_________________

Who is John Galt?

Director
Joined: 06 May 2006
Posts: 791
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 2

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 11:17
B, I think...

A) We are discussing North American insects as a sample population, non-native species do not fall in the group.
B) If yes, then other species may not follow the same reduced rate of extinction, if no, then the authors conjecture may be viable.
C) Experience of the researchers is out of scope.
D) Causes of extinction are not being discussed. Nor are we particularly interested only in insects and mammals.
E) Area of wildlife refuges is also beyond the scope.
VP
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 1261
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 11:20
B. Has any special effort been made to save North American insect species?

B fits...
Director
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 940
Location: France
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 12:19
X & Y wrote:
Zoologists warn of an imminent surge in the number of animal species that will become extinct within this century. They caution that the rate of extinction will only increase. They are wrong, however. One need only consider the information gathered on insects: 47 species of North American insect vanished between 1900 and 1950, but only 23 species of such insects became extinct between 1950 and 2000.

The answer to which of the following questions provides information that would be most helpful in evaluating the argument above?

A. How many species of non-native insect species have been introduced into North America since 1950?
B. Has any special effort been made to save North American insect species?
C. How many years' experience do the zoologists have in evaluating patterns of extinction among animals?
D. Are insects susceptible to the same causes of extinction as are mammals?
E. How many acres of woodland are set aside each year as wildlife refuges?

Trap question folks!!

A - Money
B - out of scope
C - out of scope
D - out of scope
E - What the hell are you talkin bout??
_________________

I believe its yogurt!

Director
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 940
Location: France
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 12:21
B, I think...

A) We are discussing North American insects as a sample population, non-native species do not fall in the group.
B) If yes, then other species may not follow the same reduced rate of extinction, if no, then the authors conjecture may be viable.
C) Experience of the researchers is out of scope.
D) Causes of extinction are not being discussed. Nor are we particularly interested only in insects and mammals.
E) Area of wildlife refuges is also beyond the scope.

Consider 71 north american insect species were there in 1899, then use quant skills
_________________

I believe its yogurt!

Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 79
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 12:27
gmatmba wrote:
B, I think...

A) We are discussing North American insects as a sample population, non-native species do not fall in the group.
B) If yes, then other species may not follow the same reduced rate of extinction, if no, then the authors conjecture may be viable.
C) Experience of the researchers is out of scope.
D) Causes of extinction are not being discussed. Nor are we particularly interested only in insects and mammals.
E) Area of wildlife refuges is also beyond the scope.

Consider 71 north american insect species were there in 1899, then use quant skills

Yes it should be A.
VP
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 1261
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 13:40
I hate trap questions... should've seen that coming!
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 445
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 13:42
Definitely D

The argument is based on the analogy between mammals and insects. However this analogy should be justified first. So the most important question is whether they are both susceptible to the same causes of extinction, otherwise the argument is pointless.
Director
Joined: 27 Feb 2006
Posts: 623
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 48 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 14:33
I vote for ^ D ^
Director
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 940
Location: France
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 15:40
deowl wrote:
Definitely D

The argument is based on the analogy between mammals and insects. However this analogy should be justified first. So the most important question is whether they are both susceptible to the same causes of extinction, otherwise the argument is pointless.

This could be very true. But stem says animals, which could mean mammals, birds, intects, reptiles, etc ......why should we only stick to mammals? Can you please help me understand?
_________________

I believe its yogurt!

Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 635
Followers: 1

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

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 17:59
I think it is obvious that most of us will choose 'D'...

But I think the answer to 'D' & 'B' will be either an 'Yes' or 'No'.. Unless you ask more questions the facts are not given...

C - irrelevant...They are already considered as zoologists and their opinion is taken seriously for discussion...

E - May be 1 million acres ...so what ??

The author counter argues with numbers. So it is very important to know the validity of the numbers. If they are tampered with infusion of new insect species..then his argument is baseles...

So I will go for 'A' clocked around 150 secs..
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 276
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 208 [0], given: 2

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 18:49
I will also go for A.
Director
Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 572
Location: Munich,Germany
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 20:09
My money and vote for D.

The argument just says that the number of extinctions within insects has drastically come down but it is flawed to apply the same rule to other animals.Only if the insects and other animals have the same cause of extinction, then its probably justified to say that there will b indeed lesser extinctions.
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 445
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

15 Jun 2006, 21:43
gmatmba wrote:
deowl wrote:
Definitely D

The argument is based on the analogy between mammals and insects. However this analogy should be justified first. So the most important question is whether they are both susceptible to the same causes of extinction, otherwise the argument is pointless.

This could be very true. But stem says animals, which could mean mammals, birds, intects, reptiles, etc ......why should we only stick to mammals? Can you please help me understand?

The arguer makes a general assertion regarding all kinds of animals. However his example is dealing with only one very specific group: the insects. Obviously his argument is based on assumption that the distinction rate of insects is analogous to that of other animals, such as mammals for example. To stegthen his argument , he must prove that the destinction among insects could be considered a general case within animals.
Manager
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Posts: 125
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

16 Jun 2006, 08:11
I vote for D.

Increasing the number of species will only provide more opportunities for extinction. But that does not mean rate of extinction will increase or decrease if we increase the nnumber of species

Only D and not A will influence the rate

I think it is time for OA.
Manager
Joined: 25 May 2006
Posts: 227
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 65 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

16 Jun 2006, 08:16
For this one I selected D, However OA is B.

Great Work all of you!!!
_________________

Who is John Galt?

Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 445
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

16 Jun 2006, 08:23
Do you have an OE?
What is the source of this CR?
Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 635
Followers: 1

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

Show Tags

16 Jun 2006, 08:27
X & Y wrote:
For this one I selected D, However OA is B.

Great Work all of you!!!

It will be of great help if you could post the OE as well.. this is a genuine request for this challenging CR..

Thank you.
CEO
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 2898
Schools: Completed at SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - Class of 2008
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

16 Jun 2006, 10:01
B it is.

After reading the argument what you want to evaluate:

1. What is the cause of extinction?
2. Is the data given representtative?
3. Is the trend given applies to animal species as well?

Now lets go the answer choices:

A. Nope. We are talking about extinctions not introduction of new species.
B. You got it? The data given may or may not be respresentative. i.e the decrease in the extinction between 1950 and 2000 is because of what reason? This is what you want to evaluate.
C. Out of scope
D. Animals could be mammals, reptiles etc.
E. We are evaluating the trend for insects and not the animals. So there is no point in asking the question about setting woodland as wildlife refuge.

Caution: I used to make mistake by going an extra mile i.e cause of cause. but this is not a good idea for CRs. Learned this lesson after making tons of mistakes.
_________________

SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - MBA CLASS OF 2008

Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 445
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

16 Jun 2006, 10:09
ps_dahiya wrote:
B it is.
B. You got it? The data given may or may not be respresentative. i.e the decrease in the extinction between 1950 and 2000 is because of what reason? This is what you want to evaluate.

16 Jun 2006, 10:09

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 24 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Zoologists warn of an imminent surge in the number of bird 3 18 Jul 2010, 08:52
2 Plants&Animals 11 19 May 2010, 05:53
The recent surge in fear over the virulence of the Ebola 6 13 Mar 2010, 13:18
The authors of a recent article examined warnings of an 9 15 Nov 2007, 12:56
The importance of the ozone layer to terrestrial animals is 4 04 Jul 2007, 13:08
Display posts from previous: Sort by