Critical Reasoning

What do you think is the correct answer, and why? :

Thanks


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 has 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

I will go with E.

the aim is to "eliminate interference".

Option A,B & C are not relevant here.

D and E are close.

D can be true in real world, but not according to the argument. I think it is out of scope.
E explains why the solution that argument suggests would not work.

(E)

WOW!!!!!!!!! Something never changes! Such as STUPIDITY and DISRESPECT!

Hats off!

Between D & E

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

E ties to the consequences of what will happen if they explode the satellites

Bidisha,
Provide an explanation. What are u afraid of? I am thinking u r waiting for people to answer and then just copy that answer ( ). The parentheses are your mind work, hats off.....

If this is not the case start providing explanations...... I am not sure what part of our request u dont understand....

I am going to do this in every post that I see u provide an IMO(created a Bidisha template as we speak). Hope one of these posts catches your attention and u start providing explanations.

I am not sure how this can be drilled in to you.

Drill Baby Drill-> What in the world does this mean, seriously??? Is this your explanation for all the quant and Verbal questions. I am sure u can do better than that...... Hope so.....

If all we can provide is an IMO lets stay away from the actaul question post..
I am sorry, I try to be nice, but this attitude/indifference on your part is getting on to me more rapidly than a forest fire....

Hope u take this in the right spirit of the forum!


Regards,
CR

Yes should be E

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 <- Passage is related to satellites and debris ... this is irrelevant to topic in discussion...

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 < - correct as increase in number of debris will cause reflections which is going to impact Observations...

I agree with you. I'm with B too