BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

1000 CR........

Expert replies
by smclean23 » Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:32 pm
“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.



OA is B.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by bleacherseat » Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm
To me B and E are both likely candiates.

E is a milder version of B. I would have gone with E.
Join the discussion

by Jatinder » Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:15 am
IMO D

Consistent with biologist but not with politician as we have not stopped deforestation.
Join the discussion

by stop@800 » Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:54 am
bleacherseat wrote:To me B and E are both likely candiates.

E is a milder version of B. I would have gone with E.
I will go with B

E is wrong bcoz
Qn says "So all that is needed" hence we do not need mild answer choice
mild actually will go against "all that"
Join the discussion

by nishanttheone » Wed Oct 22, 2008 1:47 pm
Biologist: Deforestation continues, Koala will approach extinction.
Politician: Deforestation is stopped, Koala doesnt become extinct.

A: Parallel to Biologist's claim, but doesnt necessarily oppose Politician's claim.
B: Not consistent with Biologist's claim.
C: Reforestation - not mentioned by Biologist. Ruled out.
D: Supports Biologist's claim, and clashes with Politician's claim of stopping deforestation (contrary to slow it down).
E: Not consistent with Biologist's claim.

IMO - D
Plz explain OA - B.
Join the discussion

by rohangupta83 » Thu Oct 23, 2008 3:03 am
1st lets talk about the politician's argument - it's a little easier to work with.

The Politician states that: So all that is needed to save the koala is to stop deforestation

OR

If Deforestation is stopped, Koala survives

Statement B says ''If Deforestation is stopped, the Koala becomes extinct''. Hence, statement B refutes the politician's argument.

Note: Choice E - Deforestation is slowed and the koala approaches extinction - politician's argument does not concern with a reduced deforestation rate and its impact on Koala's. The politician simply means that if deforestation is stopped, Koala's would survive.


Moving on to the Biologist's argument:
If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction

OR

If the current rate of deforestation is maintained, Koala's will approach extinction.

OR

If the rate of deforestation is reduced, the rate at which Koala's approach extinction will also reduce (but still approach extinction - E).

OR
Unless reforestation begins, Koala's population won't start increasing and until then its in danger of extinction.

OR

Even if deforestation is stopped, the Koala is approaching extinction and eventually becomes extinct.


Note: Choice D - Deforestation is slowed and the koala survives - would refute the biologist's argument.
Join the discussion

by navami » Sat Sep 17, 2011 6:25 am
This time no looking back!!!
Navami
Join the discussion