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

cant understand..air pollution

This topic has 2 expert replies and 37 member replies
Goto page Next
shipra Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
Joined
27 May 2008
Posted:
74 messages
Thanked:
2 times
cant understand..air pollution Post Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:39 am
Elapsed Time: 00:00
  • Lap #[LAPCOUNT] ([LAPTIME])
    2. In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
    Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
    (A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
    (B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
    (C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
    (D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
    (E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.

    Thanked by: paddle_sweep
    Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!
    raunekk GMAT Titan Default Avatar
    Joined
    16 Apr 2008
    Posted:
    1161 messages
    Thanked:
    56 times
    Target GMAT Score:
    750+
    Post Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:34 am
    is d answer E??

    raviagni Just gettin' started! Default Avatar
    Joined
    04 Sep 2007
    Posted:
    13 messages
    Post Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:28 am
    I find B as the OA

    The quality of air is not the assumption

    what's the OA?

    raunekk GMAT Titan Default Avatar
    Joined
    16 Apr 2008
    Posted:
    1161 messages
    Thanked:
    56 times
    Target GMAT Score:
    750+
    Post Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:44 am
    a doubt..

    doesnt air pollution signify quality of air??

    chidcguy GMAT Destroyer! Default Avatar
    Joined
    12 Feb 2007
    Posted:
    438 messages
    Thanked:
    22 times
    Post Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:51 am
    (A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.

    What if AP problems are not caused by local industry? no need to impose regulations and conclusion falls apart


    (B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.

    What if AP regulations do not have an impact on the air quality? no need to impose regulations and conclusion falls apart


    (C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.

    What if the AP problems of other cities are not similar? No need to impose same regulations and conclusion falls apart

    (D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.

    What if the increase in number of bird species is NOT desired in London or other cities? It is still possible that the AP can be reduced.

    (E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.

    What if the increased sightings do not reflect actual increase? London did not reduce AP by regulating local industry. No need for other cities to emulate.

    To me, the negation test pulled the conclusion apart except in D

    Hence my pick is D. What is OA?

    _________________
    Please do not post answer along with the Question you post/ask

    Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.

    raunekk GMAT Titan Default Avatar
    Joined
    16 Apr 2008
    Posted:
    1161 messages
    Thanked:
    56 times
    Target GMAT Score:
    750+
    Post Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:24 am
    i was confused between D and E...but then choose E!!(this always happens with me Confused )

    Its still not clear..even i tried the negation rule !!But then ...if the Birds population is not desirable then whats the point in taking steps to prevent AP???

    But after chidcguys explanation ..i think E is a stronger contender

    thx

    Carlo75 Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
    Joined
    13 May 2008
    Posted:
    64 messages
    Thanked:
    1 times
    Target GMAT Score:
    700
    Post Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:03 pm
    I will go with A.

    air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry, the word entirely is too extreme to be an assumption ...

    But I have still doubts

    chidcguy GMAT Destroyer! Default Avatar
    Joined
    12 Feb 2007
    Posted:
    438 messages
    Thanked:
    22 times
    Post Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:20 pm
    Another reason why D is my pick is

    Assumption and conclusion are close to each other. D does not even talk about the regulations or the AP reduction that resulted from those regulations on local industry. bird increase is just evidence thats not the goal.

    With E, its saying that the evidence was misinterpreted. If the evidence was misinterpreted then the AP actually did not go down. If AP did not go down, why should other cities follow same sort of regulations? For the conclusion to stay intact the evidence should correspond to an actual increase and AP reduction.

    _________________
    Please do not post answer along with the Question you post/ask

    Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.

    GMAT/MBA Expert

    Ian Stewart GMAT Instructor
    Joined
    02 Jun 2008
    Posted:
    2178 messages
    Followed by:
    245 members
    Thanked:
    950 times
    GMAT Score:
    780
    Post Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:49 pm
    In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
    Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:


    Often the words in CR questions encourage us to bring outside knowledge to the question. We might think, when reading the above, 'of course air pollution is bad, and should be reduced', and this might lead us to ignore the structure of the argument. The argument says, essentially, "London imposed air pollution laws. The number of birds went up. Therefore the rules should be applied everywhere."

    When I see an argument like this, I'll normally replace, in my head, the words with letters. The argument is: "London did X. The number of Y went up. Therefore every other city should do X." Now the argument's structure is clear; the fact that Y went up is the justification for implementing X.

    In the original argument, what is the justification for the conclusion? Precisely that there were more birds. It's an unstated assumption that having more birds is a good thing; it's the only justification for improving air quality that is provided. So D is one of the assumptions. That we should apply London's rules elsewhere assumes other cities are similar: C is an assumption. That the increased sightings of birds actually represents an increase in the number of birds is another assumption: E is also assumed.

    B is not an assumption explicitly made in the argument. I suppose it's possible that air pollution regulations led to more birds for a different reason than by improving air quality, but that seems far-fetched. Still, if no other answer were good, this would be the choice. A, however, is clearly not assumed in the argument. The argument does not assume that local industry is 'almost entirely' the source of air pollution. It only assumes that regulation on local industry will have a positive effect.

    Incidentally, there aren't many birds in London!

    ______________


    (A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
    (B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
    (C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
    (D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
    (E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.

    _________________
    Nov 2011: After years of development, I am now making my advanced Quant books and high-level problem sets available for sale. Contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com for details.

    private GMAT tutor in Toronto

    bigfernhead Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
    Joined
    17 Mar 2008
    Posted:
    36 messages
    Thanked:
    1 times
    Post Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:05 pm
    I see your point of A).

    However, I went with D).

    I couldn't assume from the passage that more birds = more desirable.

    Good example: Pigeons. Can't imagine having more of them is a good thing Wink

    What's the OA?

    kiranlegend GMAT Destroyer! Default Avatar
    Joined
    12 Jun 2008
    Posted:
    340 messages
    Thanked:
    6 times
    Target GMAT Score:
    800
    Post Thu Jul 17, 2008 8:51 pm
    mate, the OA is given as A

    NSNguyen GMAT Destroyer! Default Avatar
    Joined
    04 May 2007
    Posted:
    401 messages
    Followed by:
    1 members
    Thanked:
    3 times
    Post Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:48 am
    I would go with E when it is out of scope.
    Laughing

    _________________
    Please share your idea and your reasoning Very Happy
    http://bmnmed.com/home/
    http://nguyensinguyen.vietnam21.org

    Thanked by: Mohamed Aneez
    srinivasarajui Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
    Joined
    14 Apr 2009
    Posted:
    51 messages
    Thanked:
    3 times
    Target GMAT Score:
    740
    GMAT Score:
    580
    Post Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:20 am
    I am agree with Ian Stewart, I think the answer is A. It assumed that some pollution is caused by local industry but not entirely.
    Thanks Ian Stewart

    _________________
    Srinu

    Phirozz Really wants to Beat The GMAT! Default Avatar
    Joined
    28 Feb 2010
    Posted:
    232 messages
    Thanked:
    10 times
    Target GMAT Score:
    750+
    Post Wed Apr 07, 2010 2:58 am
    great question
    thanx shipra for posting such a nice question

    @ Ian Stewart
    Hats off man... ur explanation is really excellent... thanx a ton

    Balrog1978 Rising GMAT Star Default Avatar
    Joined
    14 Dec 2006
    Posted:
    32 messages
    Thanked:
    1 times
    Post Tue Nov 30, 2010 1:34 pm
    Fantastic Question. If this were GMAT - I would have definitely gone with D. Too conditioned by GMAT tutoring to miss something this obvious. I guess a perfect 800 is out Smile

    Best Conversation Starters

    1 varun289 38 topics
    2 killerdrummer 22 topics
    3 sana.noor 20 topics
    4 sanaa.rizwan 14 topics
    5 guerrero 14 topics
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

    Most Active Experts

    1 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

    GMAT Prep Now Teacher

    204 posts
    2 image description GMATGuruNY

    The Princeton Review Teacher

    136 posts
    3 image description Jim@StratusPrep

    Stratus Prep

    100 posts
    4 image description Anju@Gurome

    Gurome

    74 posts
    5 image description Jon@Admissionado

    Admissionado

    51 posts
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts