Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.

See classes
Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
GMATLiveTeachStarts Nov 22
Josh Braslow, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep

Nov 22 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemandStart anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

with

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemandStart anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Mud from a lake on an uninhabited wooded island

Expert replies
by BTGmoderatorDC » Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:05 am
Timer
00:00
Your answer
Difficulty–

right wrong

Pick an answer to see how members did

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.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by deloitte247 » Sun Apr 29, 2018 8:39 am
Option A
The statement is directly the opposite of the writer's position. Here, the waters of the island lake are elevated so that the polluted lake superior ones won't infiltrate it. This option is wrong

option B
This statement is aided by diffusion action and ability of the pesticides to be transported via air/wind, absence of which would aid a healthy and natural environment. This is correct

option C
Banning such toxic chemicals means it constitutes a major hazard to the environment. By so doing, a healthier, friendlier and cleaner environment would have aided. It weakens the writer's opinion and negates the topic content. This is incorrect

option D
"Uninhabited" means unoccupied, this means the island is not a living haven for the human species and as such would not be confronted with such environment hazards. This alone leaves us with no doubt as to the position of the author that it's such a negative affirmation. This is wrong

option E
Here, the magnitude, quantity and/or level of toxicity is and should not be for debate but the adverse devastation it would wreck on the natural facilities. This is wrong
Join the discussion

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:53 am
BTGmoderatorDC wrote: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.
PREMISE: Island lake contains toxic chemicals
PREMISE: The chemicals were not dumped in the lake, and water from Lake Superior cannot reach the lake

We want to find the most reasonable conclusion that follows from this information

(A) The waters of the island lake are more severely polluted than those of Lake Superior.
The passage does not contain any information regarding the pollution levels of Lake Superior.
Eliminate A

(B) The toxaphene was carried to the island in the atmosphere by winds.
The passage tells us that there is toxaphene in the lake, and it also tells us that the chemical could not have reached the lake via two methods. So the chemical must be reaching the island lake in some other way. This answer choice suggests one of those possible ways. Although it's only one possible way for the chemical to reach the lake, we cannot dismiss it. So we will leave answer choice B for now

(C) Banning chemicals such as toxaphene does not aid the natural environment.
There is nothing in the passage that would suggest that this is true. If anything, it seems that banning toxaphene WOULD help the environment.
Eliminate C

(D) Toxaphene has adverse effects on human beings but not on other organisms.
There is nothing in the passage that supports this claim.
Eliminate D

(E) Concentrations of toxaphene in the soil of cotton-growing regions are not sufficient of be measurable
There is nothing in the passage that supports this claim.
Eliminate E

By the process of elimination we are left with only one answer choice.

Answer: B

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image
Join the discussion