Earthquakes

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 am
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

Earthquakes

by komal » Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:39 am
Scientists propose placing seismic stations on the floor of the Pacific Ocean to warn threatened coastal
communities on the northwestern coast of the United States of approaching tidal waves caused by earthquakes.
Since forewarned communities could take steps to evacuate, many of the injuries and deaths that would
otherwise occur could be avoided if the government would implement this proposal.

The answer to which of the following questions would be most important in determining whether implementing
the proposal would be likely to achieve the desired result?

(A) When was the last time that the coastal communities were threatened by an approaching tidal wave?

(8) How far below sea level would the stations be located?

(C) Would there be enough time after receiving warning of an approaching tidal wave for communities to
evacuate safely?

(0) How soon after a tidal wave hits land is it safe for evacuees to return to their communities?

(E) Can the stations be equipped to collect and relay information about phenomena other than tidal waves
caused by earthquakes?

OA C
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 1:57 pm
Location: India
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:1 members

by abhi332 » Thu Feb 11, 2010 10:13 am
Conclusion of the argument is "Since forewarned communities could take steps to evacuate, many of the injuries and deaths that would
otherwise occur could be avoided if the government would implement this proposal"

How the system can save injuries and deaths ------------------> forewarned


choice C question the same

"Would there be enough time after receiving warning of an approaching tidal wave for communities to
evacuate safely?"

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1275
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:13 pm
Location: Arabian Sea
Thanked: 125 times
Followed by:2 members

by ajith » Thu Feb 11, 2010 10:50 am
komal wrote:Scientists propose placing seismic stations on the floor of the Pacific Ocean to warn threatened coastal
communities on the northwestern coast of the United States of approaching tidal waves caused by earthquakes.
Since forewarned communities could take steps to evacuate, many of the injuries and deaths that would
otherwise occur could be avoided if the government would implement this proposal.

The answer to which of the following questions would be most important in determining whether implementing
the proposal would be likely to achieve the desired result?

(A) When was the last time that the coastal communities were threatened by an approaching tidal wave?

(8) How far below sea level would the stations be located?

(C) Would there be enough time after receiving warning of an approaching tidal wave for communities to
evacuate safely?

(0) How soon after a tidal wave hits land is it safe for evacuees to return to their communities?

(E) Can the stations be equipped to collect and relay information about phenomena other than tidal waves
caused by earthquakes?
The Desired result : People get the early warning signal and evacuate the place before tidal waves reach the coast

A - Would not determine the effectiveness
B - It would not directly determine the effectiveness
C - The desired result is based on this, if people do not get time to evacuate it would undermine the use of such a tool
D - Irrelevant
E - Irrelevant
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:38 am
Location: India
Thanked: 7 times
Followed by:3 members
GMAT Score:730

by itheenigma » Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:38 pm
Which category do I place this CR prompt, so as to organize my thought process?

My guess - Strengthen/ Weaken..?

Rationale is that it can't be assumption, conclusion, or explain the discrepancy. Besides, the CR prompt asks us to investigate other possible factors to determine whether the proposal would achieve its desired result.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1077
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 1:44 am
Thanked: 118 times
Followed by:33 members
GMAT Score:710

by bblast » Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:07 pm
itheenigma wrote:Which category do I place this CR prompt, so as to organize my thought process?

My guess - Strengthen/ Weaken..?

Rationale is that it can't be assumption, conclusion, or explain the discrepancy. Besides, the CR prompt asks us to investigate other possible factors to determine whether the proposal would achieve its desired result.
This is an evaluate the argument CR. For answering this you need to weigh each and every answer option and see if it strengthens AND weakens the prompt. The correct answer will be one which has polar opposite effects on the prompt when interpreted in a positive and negative context.

Search "tiger beetles,gmat prep" for an excellent example on this question type.
Cheers !!

Quant 47-Striving for 50
Verbal 34-Striving for 40

My gmat journey :
https://www.beatthegmat.com/710-bblast-s ... 90735.html
My take on the GMAT RC :
https://www.beatthegmat.com/ways-to-bbla ... 90808.html
How to prepare before your MBA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upz46D7 ... TWBZF14TKW_

Legendary Member
Posts: 608
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:16 am
Thanked: 37 times
Followed by:8 members

by saketk » Thu Sep 08, 2011 12:48 am
itheenigma wrote:Which category do I place this CR prompt, so as to organize my thought process?

My guess - Strengthen/ Weaken..?

Rationale is that it can't be assumption, conclusion, or explain the discrepancy. Besides, the CR prompt asks us to investigate other possible factors to determine whether the proposal would achieve its desired result.
This is a 'Evaluation Type' question -- the approach described in CR Bible says that inorder to find the correct answer, we should try to 'negate' the statement -- it it works i.e. if that approach weakens or strengthen the stem then that's our answer.