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.

2016 OG CR 33

Expert replies
by Crystal W » Mon Jun 06, 2016 1:01 am
Which of the following most logically completes the argument below? Although the number of large artificial satellites orbiting the Earth is small compared to the number of small pieces of debris in orbit, the large satellites interfere more seriously with telescope observations because of the strong reflections they produce. Because many of those large satellites have ceased to function, the proposal recently been made to eliminate interference from nonfunctioning satellites by exploding them in space. This proposal, however, is ill conceived, since ________.

  A. Many nonfunctioning satellites remain in orbit for years

  B. For satellites that have ceased to function, repairing them while they are in orbit would be prohibitively expensive

  C. There are no known previous instances of satellites' having been exploded on purpose

  D. The only way to make telescope observations without any interference from debris in orbit is to use telescopes launched into extremely high orbits around the Earth

  E. A greatly increased number of small particles in Earth's orbit would result in a blanket of reflections that would make certain valuable telescope observations impossible

The OA is E. I am confused about C and E. I believe the description of passage emphasize large satellites have serious effects than small pieces. Thus, I think E is not correct. About C, because no known previous instances, we cannot control the result so it is ill conceived.
Can someone explain it? Thanks in advance!
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by GMATGuruNY » Mon Jun 06, 2016 2:44 am
Crystal W wrote:Which of the following most logically completes the argument below? Although the number of large artificial satellites orbiting the Earth is small compared to the number of small pieces of debris in orbit, the large satellites interfere more seriously with telescope observations because of the strong reflections they produce. Because many of those large satellites have ceased to function, the proposal recently been made to eliminate interference from nonfunctioning satellites by exploding them in space. This proposal, however, is ill conceived, since ________.

  A. Many nonfunctioning satellites remain in orbit for years

  B. For satellites that have ceased to function, repairing them while they are in orbit would be prohibitively expensive

  C. There are no known previous instances of satellites' having been exploded on purpose

  D. The only way to make telescope observations without any interference from debris in orbit is to use telescopes launched into extremely high orbits around the Earth

  E. A greatly increased number of small particles in Earth's orbit would result in a blanket of reflections that would make certain valuable telescope observations impossible
Proposal: To eliminate telescopic interference from nonfunctioning large satellites by exploding them in space.
Conclusion: This proposal is ill-conceived.

To support the conclusion, the correct answer choice must explain why the proposed plan will not eliminate interference or how it will yield unintended negative consequences.

E: A greatly increased number of small particles in Earth's orbit would result in a blanket of reflections that would make certain valuable telescope observations impossible.
Implication:
The explosion of large satellites will greatly increase the number of small particles in Earth's orbit, rendering certain valuable telescopic observations impossible.
Since the goal of the proposal is to ELIMINATE TELESCOPIC INTERFERENCE, the proposal is ill-conceived.

The correct answer is E.
About C, because no known previous instances, we cannot control the result so it is ill conceived.
The portion in red is not necessarily true.
By this logic, ANY PLAN never tried before is ill-conceived.
To weaken a plan, the correct answer must show WHY the plan will not work or HOW it will yield unintended negative consequences.
To indicate that a plan has not been tried before is insufficient to conclude that the plan is ill-conceived.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Join the discussion