Welcome! Check out our free B-School Guides to learn how you compare with other applicants.
Login or Register
 

1000CR Question No 11 : LSATII

This topic has 1 expert reply and 9 member replies
samyak Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
Joined
27 Mar 2010
Posted:
90 messages
1000CR Question No 11 : LSATII Post Thu May 13, 2010 10:09 am
Elapsed Time: 00:00
  • Lap #[LAPCOUNT] ([LAPTIME])
    11. “If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction,” said the biologist.
    “So all that is needed to save the koala is to stop deforestation,” said the politician.
    Which one of the following statements is consistent with the biologist’s claim but not with the politician’s claim?
    (A) Deforestation continues and the koala becomes extinct.
    (B) Deforestation is stopped and the koala becomes extinct.
    (C) Reforestation begins and the koala survives.
    (D) Deforestation is slowed and the koala survives.
    (E) Deforestation is slowed and the koala approaches extinction.

    IMO the answer in D. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!
    thinkpanther Just gettin' started! Default Avatar
    Joined
    25 Feb 2009
    Posted:
    20 messages
    Followed by:
    1 members
    Thanked:
    1 times
    GMAT Score:
    730
    Post Tue May 18, 2010 12:06 pm
    I agree that it should be D

    sk818020 Really wants to Beat The GMAT!
    Joined
    29 Mar 2010
    Posted:
    214 messages
    Thanked:
    35 times
    GMAT Score:
    700
    Post Tue May 18, 2010 2:00 pm
    IMO the answer is B.

    This directly refutes that politicians claim, while is at least consistent with the biologists claims.

    The reason I say its consistent with the biologist's claims is that the biologist says;

    If deforrestation continues, koalas will approach extinction. - From this the only other thing we can deduce is;

    If koalas do not approach extinction, deforrestation has not continued.

    B says deforrestion has not continued and the koalas have become extinct. This supports the biologists claim because the biologist says that if deforrestation continues the koalas will approach extinction. There is a difference in becoming extinct and approaching extinction. What if, for some freak reason, the stopping of deforrestation actually caused all the pandas to die immediately? This would support the biologist because the biologist didn't say anything about what would happen if deforrestation stopped. Thus, B at least is consistent with the biologist.

    What is the official answer?



    Last edited by sk818020 on Tue May 18, 2010 3:19 pm; edited 1 time in total

    GMAT/MBA Expert

    Post Tue May 18, 2010 3:17 pm
    Note that the biologists does NOT say what will happen if deforestation is slowed. Do not confuse a necessary condition with a sufficient one!

    _________________
    Kevin Armstrong
    GMAT Instructor
    Gmatclasses
    Madrid

    Free GMAT Practice Test under Proctored Conditions! - Find a practice test near you or live and online in Kaplan's Classroom Anywhere environment. Register today!
    arohan_sambyal Just gettin' started! Default Avatar
    Joined
    13 May 2010
    Posted:
    13 messages
    Thanked:
    1 times
    Post Thu May 20, 2010 5:14 am
    i went with C because it opposes Politicians idea of stopping deforestation, instead it proposes the opposite . At the same time choice C goes with biologist "the koala survives"..what did i miss??

    gtvisa2002 Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
    Joined
    27 Nov 2007
    Posted:
    71 messages
    Thanked:
    2 times
    Test Date:
    9 Apr 2011
    Target GMAT Score:
    740
    GMAT Score:
    730
    Post Thu May 20, 2010 7:44 am
    In the post http://www.beatthegmat.com/cr-1000-t3251.html Stuart Kovinsky clearly explained the logic.

    I am just rewriting it here:
    Biologist: If deforestation, then K extinct - doesn't mean deforestation is THE ONLY reason but says it is one of the reasons
    Politician: If no deforestation, then K not extinct - means deforestation is THE ONLY reason.

    Our option should say :
    deforestation is stopped and still K approaches extinction to be not consistant with Politician.

    So we are left with B and D.
    However D doesn't say deforestation stopped. It has to be "stopped" in order to refute politician's view.

    HTH. Thanks

    siddus Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
    Joined
    24 Mar 2010
    Posted:
    87 messages
    Followed by:
    1 members
    Thanked:
    3 times
    Post Sat Jun 05, 2010 1:41 am
    Hi,

    If we note the politicians statement: "So all that is needed to save the koala is to stop deforestation", we find that the necessary condition, indicated by the word needed is referring to the action stop deforestation

    So shouldn't the diagram read as follows -

    If K not extinct, then no deforestation
    (sufficient: If K not extinct -----> necessary: no deforestation)

    I cant get my head around this!!

    Any help is most appreciated.

    Sid.

    vikram4689 GMAT Titan
    Joined
    01 Nov 2009
    Posted:
    1324 messages
    Followed by:
    13 members
    Thanked:
    99 times
    Post Fri Apr 13, 2012 11:18 am
    kevincanspain wrote:
    Note that the biologists does NOT say what will happen if deforestation is slowed. Do not confuse a necessary condition with a sufficient one!
    Please elaborate this & how D is incorrect

    _________________
    Premise: If you like my post
    Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button Wink

    EducationAisle GMAT Destroyer!
    Joined
    27 Mar 2010
    Posted:
    381 messages
    Followed by:
    35 members
    Thanked:
    76 times
    Post Sat Apr 14, 2012 7:07 am
    vikram4689 wrote:
    Please elaborate this & how D is incorrect
    Politician's claim: So all that is needed to save the koala is to stop deforestation

    D, which says: "Deforestation is slowed and the koala survives" is not inconsistent with Politician's claim.

    This is basically what politician is saying: If there is no deforestation, Koala will survive.

    _________________
    Ashish
    MBA - ISB, GMAT - 99th Percentile
    GMAT Faculty @ EducationAisle
    www.EducationAisle.com

    Read testimonials of our students who made it to top schools (IIMs, ISB, Darden and XLRI, among others): http://EducationAisle.com/testimonials.html

    vikram4689 GMAT Titan
    Joined
    01 Nov 2009
    Posted:
    1324 messages
    Followed by:
    13 members
    Thanked:
    99 times
    Post Sat Apr 14, 2012 8:21 am
    Politician's claim: So all that is needed to save the koala is to stop deforestation IMPLIES Koala can be saved only be stopping deforestation

    Now D says Koala can be saved by slowing deforestation. Isn't it inconsistent, what am i missing

    _________________
    Premise: If you like my post
    Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button Wink

    vikram4689 GMAT Titan
    Joined
    01 Nov 2009
    Posted:
    1324 messages
    Followed by:
    13 members
    Thanked:
    99 times
    Post Sun Apr 15, 2012 11:43 am
    Anyone who would like to give it a shot !

    _________________
    Premise: If you like my post
    Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button Wink

    Best Conversation Starters

    1 varun289 42 topics
    2 greenwich 25 topics
    3 guerrero 20 topics
    4 sana.noor 19 topics
    5 killerdrummer 19 topics
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

    Most Active Experts

    1 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

    GMAT Prep Now Teacher

    196 posts
    2 image description GMATGuruNY

    The Princeton Review Teacher

    143 posts
    3 image description Anju@Gurome

    Gurome

    121 posts
    4 image description Jim@StratusPrep

    Stratus Prep

    86 posts
    5 image description David@VeritasPrep

    Veritas Prep

    41 posts
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts