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

Redeem

must be true

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:06 am
Thanked: 6 times

must be true

by gmatnmein2010 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:39 pm
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 hypotheses?
(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 of be measurable.
I have oa but no oe
I selected a as others seem to be out of context
But I am wrng
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2109
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:25 pm
Location: New Jersey
Thanked: 109 times
Followed by:79 members
GMAT Score:640

by money9111 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:45 pm
hhhmmm I also chose A but i told myself "this is weak".... can you post the explanation as to why this is wrong? I feel that B/C/D are definitely wrong because the is no mention of winds, banning of chemicals, or human effect... I know it's asking for the hypothesis but I would assume that there would have been a stronger link to one of these choices if they were correct
My goal is to make MBA applicants take onus over their process.

My story from Pre-MBA to Cornell MBA - New Post in Pre-MBA blog

Me featured on Poets & Quants

Free Book for MBA Applicants

Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Tue Feb 09, 2010 11:13 pm
Tha claims in argument are
toxaphene, a banned pesticide and was not used in nearby regions of Canada or the northern United, but in the southern United States.
and
No dumping has occurred on the island
+
The island lake is sufficiently elevated that water from Lake Superior does not reach it.
But even then
island in northern Lake Superior contains toxaphene

so there is a missing link and that is How the toxic reached to this island
hence we need an ans which solves this mystry

a) wheteher it is more or less we cant say..it cud be true or couldn't be ture...but we need must be true
b) if there are toxaphene found in the island then there has to be some medium and B discovers that medium
c) out of scope
d) irrelevant
e) measurement is not the issue here....hence irrelevant
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:06 am
Thanked: 6 times

by gmatnmein2010 » Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:43 am
thephoenix wrote:Tha claims in argument are
toxaphene, a banned pesticide and was not used in nearby regions of Canada or the northern United, but in the southern United States.
and
No dumping has occurred on the island
+
The island lake is sufficiently elevated that water from Lake Superior does not reach it.
But even then
island in northern Lake Superior contains toxaphene

so there is a missing link and that is How the toxic reached to this island
hence we need an ans which solves this mystry

a) wheteher it is more or less we cant say..it cud be true or couldn't be ture...but we need must be true
b) if there are toxaphene found in the island then there has to be some medium and B discovers that medium
c) out of scope
d) irrelevant
e) measurement is not the issue here....hence irrelevant
but as per PS cr bible in MUST be true Q any outside information is incorrect ; and B introduces an assumption so it should be out of scope
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 758
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:32 pm
Location: Bangalore,India
Thanked: 67 times
Followed by:2 members

by sumanr84 » Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:02 am
money9111 wrote:hhhmmm I also chose A but i told myself "this is weak".... can you post the explanation as to why this is wrong? I feel that B/C/D are definitely wrong because the is no mention of winds, banning of chemicals, or human effect... I know it's asking for the hypothesis but I would assume that there would have been a stronger link to one of these choices if they were correct
First of all, A cannot be the answer as it uses very strong wordings - more severely polluted
Logically also, water from Lake Superior should be more toxic than water from island as Lake is the source.

C,D, and E are out-of-scope, as the hypothesis should only focus on how the water got toxic in island lake.

B - right ans ( gives a possibility )
I am on a break !!
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 12:28 am
Thanked: 20 times
Followed by:1 members

by bhumika.k.shah » Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:39 am
This is a must be true question . Where u cant suspect the stimulus.

Now the conclusion is The island lake is sufficiently elevated that water from Lake Superior does not reach it.

We have to give an answer that is within the scope of the stimulus .

Though at first i opted for A . But then i chose B. We cant comment on which lake is more polluted .

I'd go with B .
If there wasnt any dumping occurred on the island and this product was banned in few parts of us of America and was available only in southern us of A . then there has to be some other source for this contamination.
Only B fits well .

P.s.: but i have a question. This is a must be true question . right ? so then isnt this answer option not related to the text. There is no mention of this whatsoever in the stimulus . How can this be the right answer.

But even A isnt the right answer as we cant comment on which1 is more polluted.

Can some instructor/tutor/expert please clear my doubt.

THanks!
thephoenix wrote:Tha claims in argument are
toxaphene, a banned pesticide and was not used in nearby regions of Canada or the northern United, but in the southern United States.
and
No dumping has occurred on the island
+
The island lake is sufficiently elevated that water from Lake Superior does not reach it.
But even then
island in northern Lake Superior contains toxaphene

so there is a missing link and that is How the toxic reached to this island
hence we need an ans which solves this mystry

a) wheteher it is more or less we cant say..it cud be true or couldn't be ture...but we need must be true
b) if there are toxaphene found in the island then there has to be some medium and B discovers that medium
c) out of scope
d) irrelevant
e) measurement is not the issue here....hence irrelevant
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 6:24 pm
Thanked: 2 times

by mgmt_gmat » Thu Feb 11, 2010 10:03 am
Hre A can't be the answer. Choice B actually states the responses. As the chemical tox.. moves through winds. Otherwise ho it harms the cotton agriculture?
Top
User avatar
MBA Student
Posts: 403
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 7:32 pm
Thanked: 98 times
Followed by:22 members

by fibbonnaci » Thu Feb 11, 2010 10:32 am
received a pm,

I know where the confusion stems from. the last sentence- " The island lake is sufficiently elevated that water from Lake Superior does not reach it". This is a nice trap.
this sentence makes you to infer that lake superior is more polluted than the mud lake. But the pollution levels are not compared in the stimulus at all.
for must be true type of questions, follow the scope based approach.
I am not gonna explain the errors again. I have already explained them in detail.
Note- the question stem say which strongly support the hypothesis. What is the hypothesis?
The whole stimulus is talking about how the mud lake is polluted though no nearby source is available. so in effect the author is trying to hypothesize the source. Hence the stimulus must support this hypothesis.

Lets look at the options:

(A) The waters of the island lake are more severely polluted than those of Lake Superior. [comparison error. Eliminated!]

(B) The toxaphene was carried to the island in the atmosphere by winds. [alternate hypothesis is given. This lies in sync with the stimulus. it demonstrates how the mud lake could have got polluted even though nearby source does not exist. the option totally is in harmony with the stimulus. it does not disagree with the stimulus at any point. My answer]

(C) Banning chemicals such as toxaphene does not aid the natural environment. [New topic error]

(D) Toxaphene has adverse effects on human beings but not on other organisms. [New topic error. Eliminated!]

(E) Concentrations of toxaphene in the soil of cotton-growing regions are not sufficient of be measurable. [Negation error. we are talking about nearby areas not growing cotton crops. Eliminated!]

Hope this helps!

PS: so you see how my techniques work for must be true type of questions. other than the correct answer choice, all others are bound to fall into one of the errors that i had mentioned. developing familiarity with those techniques is bound to help in must be true type of questions!
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 am
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

by komal » Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:51 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 hypotheses?

(A) The waters of the island lake are more severely polluted than those of Lake Superior.
Incorrect : This one is too general. We do not know how polluted Lake Superior or the island lake are from the other pollutants. We only know about about the specific pollutant toxaphene. Eliminated.

(B) The toxaphene was carried to the island in the atmosphere by winds.
Correct : Arrived at this answer choice by POE.

(C) Banning chemicals such as toxaphene does not aid the natural environment.
Incorrect : Clearly out of scope

(D) Toxaphene has adverse effects on human beings but not on other organisms.
Incorrect : Irrelevant to the scope of the argument.

(E) Concentrations of toxaphene in the soil of cotton-growing regions are not sufficient of be measurable.
Incorrect : The argument doesnt talk about measuring concentrations .
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:23 am

by joseph32 » Sun May 15, 2016 11:24 pm
Answer B seems to be logical one out of other answer choices
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1