• NEW! FREE Beat The GMAT Quizzes
    NEW! FREE Beat The GMAT Quizzes
    NEW! FREE Beat The GMAT Quizzes
    Hundreds of Questions Highly Detailed Reporting Expert Explanations TAKE A FREE GMAT QUIZ
  • 7 CATs FREE!
    If you earn 100 Forum Points

    Engage in the Beat The GMAT forums to earn
    100 points for $49 worth of Veritas practice GMATs FREE

    Veritas Prep
    VERITAS PRACTICE GMAT EXAMS
    Earn 10 Points Per Post
    Earn 10 Points Per Thanks
    Earn 10 Points Per Upvote
    REDEEM NOW

Inference doubt

This topic has 2 expert replies and 18 member replies
Goto page
  • 1,
  • 2
Next

Inference doubt

Post
Until recently, the scholarly consensus was that few marine species are approaching extinction. Closer examination of marine species near the island of West Indies, however, revealed many factors, such as climate change and …fishing, that may be contributing to the extinction of species thought to be safe. The rate of extinction of marine species may be just as high as that of non-marine species, but the lack of systematic sampling has disguised the trend.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the statements given?

(A) There are many marine species near West Indies that are nearing extinction.
(B) Scholars who analyze the possible extinction of non-marine species rely on systematic sampling to determine which species are endangered.
(C) If systematic sampling were a more common practice in marine environments, there would likely be more evidence supporting the hypothesis that many marine species are approaching extinction.
(D) The threat to marine species near West Indies is more severe than the threat to marine species whose habitats are elsewhere.
(E) If the rate of climate change were arrested and …fishing were curtailed, the rate of extinction of marine species would
fall to a level far below that of non-marine species.

OA: C
IMO: B

B is incorrect because it talks about the information for non-marine species, and the argument doesn't show any co-relation between marine and non-marine species.

But I am really confused about C,the argument states about the few marine species then wny does is conclude about many marine species
Even if the rate of extinction is high. The argument doesn't specify 'high'.High can 0.2 or 100000.

expert please guide me to get to the root of this argument.

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Legendary Member
Joined
14 Apr 2009
Posted:
976 messages
Followed by:
12 members
Upvotes:
49
Test Date:
18.10.2012
Target GMAT Score:
760
GMAT Score:
700
Post
Until recently, the scholarly consensus was that few marine species are approaching extinction. Closer examination of marine species near the island of West Indies, however, revealed many factors, such as climate change and …fishing, that may be contributing to the extinction of species thought to be safe. The rate of extinction of marine species may be just as high as that of non-marine species, but the lack of systematic sampling has disguised the trend.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the statements given?

(A) There are many marine species near West Indies that are nearing extinction.
This is given in the passage - ruled out.
(B) Scholars who analyze the possible extinction of non-marine species rely on systematic sampling to determine which species are endangered. The passage states about the lack of systematic sampling indicating that systematic sampling was not used which disguised the trend. On the contrary, this option refers about relying on systematic sampling. Thus, ruled out.
(C) If systematic sampling were a more common practice in marine environments, there would likely be more evidence supporting the hypothesis that many marine species are approaching extinction. This is appropriately supported by the stimulus since it identifies that the systematic sampling was not effectively used and talks about the identified trend if the SA was properly used
(D) The threat to marine species near West Indies is more severe than the threat to marine species whose habitats are elsewhere. - out of scope - ruled out.
(E) If the rate of climate change were arrested and …fishing were curtailed, the rate of extinction of marine species would
fall to a level far below that of non-marine species. out of scope - ruled out.


Hope it helps! Smile

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Legendary Member Default Avatar
Joined
07 May 2010
Posted:
1119 messages
Followed by:
2 members
Upvotes:
29
Post
gauravgundal wrote:
Until recently, the scholarly consensus was that few marine species are approaching extinction. Closer examination of marine species near the island of West Indies, however, revealed many factors, such as climate change and …fishing, that may be contributing to the extinction of species thought to be safe. The rate of extinction of marine species may be just as high as that of non-marine species, but the lack of systematic sampling has disguised the trend.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the statements given?

(A) There are many marine species near West Indies that are nearing extinction.
(B) Scholars who analyze the possible extinction of non-marine species rely on systematic sampling to determine which species are endangered.
(C) If systematic sampling were a more common practice in marine environments, there would likely be more evidence supporting the hypothesis that many marine species are approaching extinction.
(D) The threat to marine species near West Indies is more severe than the threat to marine species whose habitats are elsewhere.
(E) If the rate of climate change were arrested and …fishing were curtailed, the rate of extinction of marine species would
fall to a level far below that of non-marine species.

OA: C
IMO: B

B is incorrect because it talks about the information for non-marine species, and the argument doesn't show any co-relation between marine and non-marine species.

But I am really confused about C,the argument states about the few marine species then wny does is conclude about many marine species
Even if the rate of extinction is high. The argument doesn't specify 'high'.High can 0.2 or 100000.

expert please guide me to get to the root of this argument.
C here too,

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Joined
30 Jun 2008
Posted:
87 messages
Followed by:
2 members
Upvotes:
14
Facebook Logo
Post
gauravgundal wrote:
Until recently, the scholarly consensus was that few marine species are approaching extinction. Closer examination of marine species near the island of West Indies, however, revealed many factors, such as climate change and …fishing, that may be contributing to the extinction of species thought to be safe. The rate of extinction of marine species may be just as high as that of non-marine species, but the lack of systematic sampling has disguised the trend.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the statements given?

(A) There are many marine species near West Indies that are nearing extinction.
(B) Scholars who analyze the possible extinction of non-marine species rely on systematic sampling to determine which species are endangered.
(C) If systematic sampling were a more common practice in marine environments, there would likely be more evidence supporting the hypothesis that many marine species are approaching extinction.
(D) The threat to marine species near West Indies is more severe than the threat to marine species whose habitats are elsewhere.
(E) If the rate of climate change were arrested and …fishing were curtailed, the rate of extinction of marine species would
fall to a level far below that of non-marine species.

OA: C
IMO: B

B is incorrect because it talks about the information for non-marine species, and the argument doesn't show any co-relation between marine and non-marine species.

But I am really confused about C,the argument states about the few marine species then wny does is conclude about many marine species
Even if the rate of extinction is high. The argument doesn't specify 'high'.High can 0.2 or 100000.

expert please guide me to get to the root of this argument.
C is just another way of saying what was stated in the last sentence of the passage ("The rate of extinction of marine species may be just as high as that of non-marine species, but the lack of systematic sampling has disguised the trend.").
You are correct that the argument initially mentions that only few marine species are considered endangered. But, the author went on to say that the rate of extinction of marine species might reach that of non-marine species, a rate considered high. So, the author already disputes the common consensus stated in the beginning of the passage.

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
16 Oct 2010
Posted:
38 messages
Test Date:
Hopefully 14th nov
Target GMAT Score:
720+
Post
B is out of score.. No where mentioned of technology used with non marine specis...

C is correct...

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
25 Aug 2010
Posted:
44 messages
Upvotes:
6
Post
gauravgundal wrote:
Until recently, the scholarly consensus was that few marine species are approaching extinction. Closer examination of marine species near the island of West Indies, however, revealed many factors, such as climate change and …fishing, that may be contributing to the extinction of species thought to be safe. The rate of extinction of marine species may be just as high as that of non-marine species, but the lack of systematic sampling has disguised the trend.
B is out of scope, that's for sure. The part about non-marine species is used to throw the reader off.

What you need to look for in this is something that supports these statements, and a minor hint is that the last sentence is not a conclusion, but another statement. With that said, C fits what they are trying to conclude, as most of you have already mentioned...

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Legendary Member Default Avatar
Joined
15 Jan 2010
Posted:
2330 messages
Followed by:
26 members
Upvotes:
56
Facebook Logo
Post
i Can U pls reveal the source

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Legendary Member Default Avatar
Joined
15 Jan 2010
Posted:
2330 messages
Followed by:
26 members
Upvotes:
56
Facebook Logo
Post
rooster wrote:
gauravgundal wrote:
Until recently, the scholarly consensus was that few marine species are approaching extinction. Closer examination of marine species near the island of West Indies, however, revealed many factors, such as climate change and …fishing, that may be contributing to the extinction of species thought to be safe. The rate of extinction of marine species may be just as high as that of non-marine species, but the lack of systematic sampling has disguised the trend.
B is out of scope, that's for sure. The part about non-marine species is used to throw the reader off.

What you need to look for in this is something that supports these statements, and a minor hint is that the last sentence is not a conclusion, but another statement. With that said, C fits what they are trying to conclude, as most of you have already mentioned...
The last statement may as well be taken as an explanation for the change in stance that the Researchers had taken initially on the extinction of Marine species

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Legendary Member
Joined
12 Sep 2010
Posted:
752 messages
Followed by:
10 members
Upvotes:
20
GMAT Score:
700
Post
gauravgundal wrote:
Until recently, the scholarly consensus was that few marine species are approaching extinction. Closer examination of marine species near the island of West Indies, however, revealed many factors, such as climate change and …fishing, that may be contributing to the extinction of species thought to be safe. The rate of extinction of marine species may be just as high as that of non-marine species, but the lack of systematic sampling has disguised the trend.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the statements given?

(A) There are many marine species near West Indies that are nearing extinction.
(B) Scholars who analyze the possible extinction of non-marine species rely on systematic sampling to determine which species are endangered.
(C) If systematic sampling were a more common practice in marine environments, there would likely be more evidence supporting the hypothesis that many marine species are approaching extinction.
(D) The threat to marine species near West Indies is more severe than the threat to marine species whose habitats are elsewhere.
(E) If the rate of climate change were arrested and …fishing were curtailed, the rate of extinction of marine species would
fall to a level far below that of non-marine species.

OA: C
IMO: B

B is incorrect because it talks about the information for non-marine species, and the argument doesn't show any co-relation between marine and non-marine species.

But I am really confused about C,the argument states about the few marine species then wny does is conclude about many marine species
Even if the rate of extinction is high. The argument doesn't specify 'high'.High can 0.2 or 100000.

expert please guide me to get to the root of this argument.
Please advise source of the question.
It is very important for everone to know the source of the question.
Please read below a message from one of the MGMAT expert "Whitney Garner"


Quote:
1) If you don't know the source, then you don't know whether you are compromising your future practice tests. What if the question is from the practice test you're about to take and now you see a question that you've already seen before? When that happens, it can blow the validity of your whole test! (Not if it happens just once, of course, but what if it happens multiple times?)

2) If you're taking a practice test and do see a question you've seen before, you'll probably answer it more quickly. This will give you a false sense of timing security because you now have a little more time... but that situation will NEVER be replicated on the real test.

3) The source might be bad. Do you want to study from a bad source? I don't!
_____
__

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMAT Instructor
Joined
10 Jan 2011
Posted:
132 messages
Followed by:
37 members
Upvotes:
68
GMAT Score:
780
Post
The word "many" does not have a formal logical definition, the way "most" implies "more than half" and "some" implies "more than zero." To summarize the statements given here:

1) Some claim that few marine species are going extinct...
2)...but they're wrong [So, it must be that "more than few" are going extinct].
3) The reason they're wrong is due to a lack of systematic sampling.

Inference --> If they used systematic sampling, they'd see "more than few" marine species going extinct. "Many," an intentionally vague term, often shows up in Inference questions like this, much like the words "can" or "about" which similarly are left open to many interpretations and thus are almost always properly inferrable.

As for B, you're not crazy to notice it; it's tempting because we're told that non-marine extinction estimates are higher and that systematic sampling would raise our marine extinction estimates to comparable levels. However, as many have pointed out above, we can't know for sure that the non-marine extinction estimates are in fact based upon systematic sampling. It seems very likely that they are, but "very likey" on GMAT Inference questions is synonymous with "wrong." Smile

rooster wrote:
What you need to look for in this is something that supports these statements, and a minor hint is that the last sentence is not a conclusion, but another statement. With that said, C fits what they are trying to conclude, as most of you have already mentioned...
Be careful here! This is an Inference, not a Strengthener, question. This is a common mistake -- they're not asking you to "support the Argument above," as in a Strengthener question, but in fact to use the statatements above TO support the correct answer. This owrding is important since there is no Conclusion here at all, only a set of Evidence.[

_________________
Prep Smarter, Score Higher
www.knewton.com

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Dive right in with Knewton. Summer savings on GMAT Prep for $349 + additional $900 Mega Bonus from BTG. Enroll TODAY.
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Joined
29 Dec 2009
Posted:
43 messages
Upvotes:
2
Facebook Logo
Post
AdamKnewton wrote:
The word "many" does not have a formal logical definition, the way "most" implies "more than half" and "some" implies "more than zero." To summarize the statements given here:

1) Some claim that few marine species are going extinct...
2)...but they're wrong [So, it must be that "more than few" are going extinct].
3) The reason they're wrong is due to a lack of systematic sampling.

Inference --> If they used systematic sampling, they'd see "more than few" marine species going extinct. "Many," an intentionally vague term, often shows up in Inference questions like this, much like the words "can" or "about" which similarly are left open to many interpretations and thus are almost always properly inferrable.

As for B, you're not crazy to notice it; it's tempting because we're told that non-marine extinction estimates are higher and that systematic sampling would raise our marine extinction estimates to comparable levels. However, as many have pointed out above, we can't know for sure that the non-marine extinction estimates are in fact based upon systematic sampling. It seems very likely that they are, but "very likey" on GMAT Inference questions is synonymous with "wrong." Smile

rooster wrote:
What you need to look for in this is something that supports these statements, and a minor hint is that the last sentence is not a conclusion, but another statement. With that said, C fits what they are trying to conclude, as most of you have already mentioned...
Be careful here! This is an Inference, not a Strengthener, question. This is a common mistake -- they're not asking you to "support the Argument above," as in a Strengthener question, but in fact to use the statatements above TO support the correct answer. This owrding is important since there is no Conclusion here at all, only a set of Evidence.[
nice one....thanks for explaining the difference in what they re asking..(inference vs strengthening)

_________________
Back !!!

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
14 Apr 2010
Posted:
12 messages
Post
AdamKnewton, can u tell us your method to deal with this type of question?

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Legendary Member Default Avatar
Joined
15 Jan 2010
Posted:
2330 messages
Followed by:
26 members
Upvotes:
56
Facebook Logo
Post
ahnan wrote:
AdamKnewton, can u tell us your method to deal with this type of question?
For this I guess U will have to Join the Knewton Classsroom Course Smile

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMAT Instructor
Joined
10 Jan 2011
Posted:
132 messages
Followed by:
37 members
Upvotes:
68
GMAT Score:
780
Post
mundasingh123 wrote:
ahnan wrote:
AdamKnewton, can u tell us your method to deal with this type of question?
For this I guess U will have to Join the Knewton Classsroom Course Smile
Lol@mundasingh. I will explain how I approached it, but of course anyone is always welcome to take my Knewton Classroom Course Smile

@ahnan:

I like to start by figuring out any big Inferences, which will likely not be the right answer but might help -- here, simply that there are more marine species facing extinction that we thought, and the author believes this as fact. However, the only real way to handle Inference questions is with confident elimination of answer choices:

A) The West Indies is mentioned in the passage, but not in relation to how many species are endangered there; this is the part where the author is introducing "other factors." Distortion. Eliminate.
B) Systematic sampling is mentioned in that it would improve our estimates of marine extinction. Yet we're not explicitly told that this technique is used for non-marine life. Therefore it seems like a Distortion again. I will keep it because it's possible I've misread it and if nothing else works I have to read it more carefully, but I think it's wrong.
C) The word "likely" is very tempting because it makes this choice not so definite and therefore more likely inferrable. As explained above, it is inferrable. Probably the answer.
D) As soon as I say "more severe than," I think it could be an Irrelevant Comparison. What's being compared? West Indies threat to Elsewhere threat. No evidence for this in the passage. Eliminate.
E) Climate change is just one of a few factors mentioned. Also, extreme language of "far below" is not mentioned in the passage. Extreme on both accounts. Eliminate.

Since (C) is so good, no reason to reread (B); I'm confident now it's a Distortion. C, final answer.

_________________
Prep Smarter, Score Higher
www.knewton.com

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Dive right in with Knewton. Summer savings on GMAT Prep for $349 + additional $900 Mega Bonus from BTG. Enroll TODAY.
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
15 Jun 2011
Posted:
17 messages
Upvotes:
1
Post
I think that in order to answer this question. We should understand method of reasoning in stimulus.
Initially, author mentioned that researchers concluded "few" of extinction. After that author used a contradiction "however". Finally, author used some details to show that extinction can high if there are some valid samplings.


Therefore, I think that author want to mention researchers' conclusion.
=> C is best answer for question.
Correct me if I have mistakes. Thank alots

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
  • PrepScholar GMAT
    5 Day FREE Trial
    Study Smarter, Not Harder

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    PrepScholar GMAT
  • Veritas Prep
    Free Veritas GMAT Class
    Experience Lesson 1 Live Free

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Veritas Prep
  • Kaplan Test Prep
    Free Practice Test & Review
    How would you score if you took the GMAT

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Kaplan Test Prep
  • Magoosh
    Magoosh
    Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Magoosh
  • Economist Test Prep
    Free Trial & Practice Exam
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Economist Test Prep
  • Target Test Prep
    5-Day Free Trial
    5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Target Test Prep
  • The Princeton Review
    FREE GMAT Exam
    Know how you'd score today for $0

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    The Princeton Review
  • Varsity Tutors
    Award-winning private GMAT tutoring
    Register now and save up to $200

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Varsity Tutors
  • EMPOWERgmat Slider
    1 Hour Free
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    EMPOWERgmat Slider
  • e-gmat Exclusive Offer
    Get 300+ Practice Questions
    25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    e-gmat Exclusive Offer

Top First Responders*

1 Ian Stewart 41 first replies
2 Brent@GMATPrepNow 40 first replies
3 Scott@TargetTestPrep 39 first replies
4 Jay@ManhattanReview 32 first replies
5 GMATGuruNY 26 first replies
* Only counts replies to topics started in last 30 days
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members

Most Active Experts

1 image description Scott@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

159 posts
2 image description Max@Math Revolution

Math Revolution

92 posts
3 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

GMAT Prep Now Teacher

60 posts
4 image description Ian Stewart

GMATiX Teacher

50 posts
5 image description GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

37 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts