Organic Life

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:04 pm
Thanked: 2 times

Organic Life

by sanyalpritish » Mon Apr 12, 2010 8:42 pm
Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical fertilizers and pesticide
in farming is harmful to local wildlife. To produce the same amount of food,
however, more land must be under cultivation when organic farming techniques are used than when chemicals are used. Therefore, organic farming leaves less
land available as habitat for local wildlife.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the author's argument
depends?

(A) Chemical fertilizers and pesticides pose no health threat to wildlife.

(B) Wildlife living near farms where chemicals are used will not ingest any food
or water containing those chemicals.

(C) The only disadvantage to using chemicals in farming is their potential effect
on wildlife.

(D) The same crops are grown on organic farms as on farms where chemicals are
used.

(E) Land cultivated by organic farming methods no longer constitutes a habitat
for wildlife
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:47 pm
Thanked: 10 times

by Phirozz » Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:08 pm
IMO E

organc farming leaves less land for wild life. Its valid only when E is assumed

Legendary Member
Posts: 576
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:31 pm
Thanked: 97 times
Followed by:1 members

by liferocks » Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:11 pm
is the ans D because if that is not the case there might be an alternate explanation for why more land is required in organic farming than that in farming with chemicals.

GMAT Instructor
Posts: 357
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 8:31 pm
Thanked: 128 times
Followed by:7 members

by grockit_andrea » Tue Apr 13, 2010 7:40 am
I would say E here. The conclusion is that organic farming leaves less land available as habitat for local wildlife; if E weren't true, and organic farmland could still be wildlife habitat, then the conclusion wouldn't make sense any more, based on the evidence. Since the question stem asks about the assumption that the argument depends on, the assumption is something that is necessary to the conclusion. Therefore, E is the best fit.
Andrea A.
Grockit Tutor
https://www.grockit.com

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:04 pm
Thanked: 2 times

by sanyalpritish » Tue Apr 13, 2010 10:07 am
OA_E
Thanks

Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pm
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:1 members

by paes » Wed Apr 14, 2010 1:02 am
D ;

While comparing the two methods, the assumption should be that the methods are performed under the similar circumstances.

E: weakens the argument, can't be a assumption.