environmentalist

This topic has expert replies
Legendary Member
Posts: 876
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:14 am
Thanked: 13 times

environmentalist

by ketkoag » Tue Apr 21, 2009 2:48 am
Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game Authority would have the public believe that increases in the number of marine fish caught demonstrate that this resource is no longer endangered. This is a specious argument, as unsound as it would be to assert that the ever-increasing rate at which rain forests are being cut down demonstrates a lack of danger to that resource. The real cause of the increased fish-catch is a greater efficiency in using technologies that deplete resources.
The environmentalist’s statements, if true, best support which of the following as a conclusion?
(A) The use of technology is the reason for the increasing encroachment of people on nature.
(B) It is possible to determine how many fish are in the sea in some way other than by catching fish.
(C) The proportion of marine fish that are caught is as high as the proportion of rain-forest trees that are cut down each year.
(D) Modern technologies waste resources by catching inedible fish.
(E) Marine fish continue to be an endangered resource.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 2567
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:05 am
Thanked: 712 times
Followed by:550 members
GMAT Score:770

by DanaJ » Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:21 am
I think A is out since this conclusion is far too "vague" and general to be drawn from a single paragraph about fish and rain forest. After all, not all technology is bad for the environment....

While it is true that the environmentalist thinks that it is impossible to determine the amount of fish left simply by considering the catch, it's also true that he doesn't point to a better method of determining the size of fish populations still alive. This is why B is out as well.

C is out since there's not talk about proportions here; it's just another example.

D is obviously out since there's nothing in the text about inedible fish.

E is the only one left: the reason for that can be found in row 2: ... this resource in no longer endangered

Legendary Member
Posts: 876
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:14 am
Thanked: 13 times

by ketkoag » Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:37 am
OA is E
i mistakenly selected the answer option A but when i reread we cannot conclude it, we have a better option among the other choices.
thanks anyways.... :)

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:33 am

by kris77 » Fri May 13, 2016 11:06 pm
Answer is clearly E here.