gocoder wrote:GMATGuruNY wrote:info2 wrote:
Hi Mitch
Option D is also wrong because it weakens the premise as well. Right?
Thanks
Correct!
D:
When large-aperture telescopes are located at high altitudes near the equator, they permit the best Earth-based observations of the center of the Milky Way Galaxy, a prime target of astronomical research.
Like B, this option attempts to weaken the PREMISE that
images from ground-based telescopes are invariably distorted by the Earth's atmosphere.
A premise is a FACT; it cannot be weakened..
Eliminate D.
Can B and D be wrong because both of them talk about specific telescopes,subgroup of telescopes located either on the mountains or on hills at equator ?
Definitely NOT.
That way of eliminating answer choices is WAY TOO SIMPLISTIC for consistently getting CR questions right.
The conclusion is that ground based telescopes will become obsolete. There could be about some specific telescope or subgroup of telescopes a fact that weakens the conclusion.
In fact, the OA talks about a very specific use of telescopes. So by a similar logic, maybe E would be eliminated.
In fact, from what I have seen, in doing CR questions, eliminating the OA first, yup, FIRST, is something people often do. Why? Because they attempt to use simplistic methods to get the right answer to CR questions, and in many cases the simplistic methods filter out the OA, leaving people with four wrong answers to choose from.
So overall, the message I want to give you is to dispense with the idea that the way to rock in CR is to come up with a bunch of formulaic ways to get to answers. The way to rock in CR is to use high level thinking to actually see and analyze exactly what is going on.
Why bother with some thing like "This answer choice is too specific." "This answer choice talks about X, while the conclusion is about Y." or "This answer choice is extreme."?
Those ideas, and even "out of scope", tend to be cop outs or half measures.
Hey, if you want to get some right answers with some minimal prep, sure use those things, but gocoder, you are working at this for real, training hard. So take it to the next level. If you are going to work on something, work on seeing what's going on in the questions for real.
You can prove each wrong answer wrong, for real.
You can prove the right answer right, for real.
Here's what I mean.
(A) The fact that a single space based telescope is over budget does not change the dynamic described in the prompt, that spaced based telescopes provide better images, and therefore ground based telescopes will become obsolete.
(B) This does not change the fact that space based telescopes provide better images.
(C) Avoiding most of the distortion does not mean avoiding all of the distortion. Space based telescopes still provide better images, and this does not weaken a conclusion based on that fact.
(D) This is irrelevant. The argument is based on a key difference between space based telescopes and Earth based telescopes. The fact that a certain way of using Earth based telescopes is the best way to use Earth based telescopes does not affect the connection between the better images provided by space based telescopes and the expected obsolescence of Earth based, or ground based, telescopes.
(E) Ok. Here you have it. Since ground based telescopes can do something key that space based telescopes cannot do, the idea that ground based telescopes will become obsolete does not currently make sense.
No rules. No formulaic methods. Just straight up logic. Always works. Never fails.
If you want to really ROCK at CR, focus on learning to use vision and logic.