BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Test 52 : Mud and chemical

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 203
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:08 am
Thanked: 6 times

Test 52 : Mud and chemical

by SmarpanGamt » Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:46 am
Mud from a lake on an uninhabited wooded island in northern Lake Superior contains toxic chemicals, including toxaphene, a banned pesticide for cotton that previously was manufactured and used, not in nearby regions of Canada or the northern United States, but in the southern United States. No dumping has occurred on the island. The island lake is sufficiently elevated that water from Lake Superior does not reach it.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which of the following hypothesis?

(A) The waters of the island lake are more severely polluted than those of Lake Superior.
(B) The toxaphene was carried to the island in the atmosphere by winds.
(C) Banning chemicals such as toxaphene does not aid the natural environment.
(D) Toxaphene has adverse effects on human beings but not on other organisms.
(E) Concentrations of toxaphene in the soil of cotton-growing regions are not sufficient to be measurable.

Please explain your pick I was confused with A and B Please explain according to Powerscore SC "most strongly support question suggest must be true question, therefore any external information is not encouraged.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:19 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:24 members

by shovan85 » Fri Oct 22, 2010 4:48 am
Between A and B, A does not help to explain the presence of Toxaphene in Lake Superior.
There are several Questions we can raise against A.
If all lakes are more polluted than Superior how does it affect Superior? Superior at higher level so water cannot flow into that from other lakes.
Other lakes are polluted but where has it been said those pollutants are Toxaphene?

Whereas B clearly says Toxaphene has been carried by wind up to Superior lake level. And in premise also it has been said the toxic chemical is found in Superior lake bottom.

We can easily discard C,D and E.

IMO B
If the problem is Easy Respect it, if the problem is tough Attack it
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 203
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:08 am
Thanked: 6 times

by SmarpanGamt » Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:30 pm
@shovan85

Thanks Got your point ! good explaination

But Can you help to explain what is the difference between " Most Strongly Support " and "Must be true" question.

Thanks
Top
User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:19 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:24 members

by shovan85 » Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:24 pm
SmarpanGamt wrote:@shovan85

Thanks Got your point ! good explaination

But Can you help to explain what is the difference between " Most Strongly Support " and "Must be true" question.

Thanks
Yes, Ron gave a nice example of this in RC workshop.

"Ron went to a restaurant 20 times last month. He ate chicken 19 times there by paying 30$ a plate".

What is the Must be true Answer:
A-Ron loves chicken
B-Ron ate something else in the Restaurant

If you think its A then you are wrong. Its B. He has eaten 20 times, 19 times chicken but what about 20-19 = 1 time he MUST have eaten but NOT chicken. So he ate something else.

Must be true mean 100% it can be proved from the premises.
Most strongly supports means 99.99% it can be proved just a little outside info is allowed.
If the problem is Easy Respect it, if the problem is tough Attack it
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1