jainrahul1985 wrote:Early in the twentieth century, Lake Konfa became very polluted. Recently fish populations have recovered as release of industrial pollutants has declined and the lake's waters have become cleaner. Fears are now being voiced that the planned construction of an oil pipeline across the lake's bottom might revive pollution and cause the fish population to decline again. However, a technology for preventing leaks is being installed. Therefore, provided this technology is effective, those fears are groundless.
The argument depends on assuming which of the following?
A. Apart from development related to the pipeline, there will be no new industrial development around the lake that will create renewed pollution in its waters.
B. Other than the possibility of a leak, there is no realistic pollution threat posed to the lake by the pipeline's construction.
C. There is no reason to believe that the leak-preventing technology would be ineffective when installed in the pipeline in Lake Konfa.
D. Damage to the lake's fish populations would be the only harm that a leak of oil from the pipeline would cause.
E. The species of fish that are present in Lake Konfa now are the same as those that were in the lake before it was affected by pollution.
Confused b/w B and D . Experts please suggest
I too received a PM asking me to comment.
This argument exhibits a
language shift.
The premise is about a
non-leaking pipe.
The conclusion is about a
lack of pollution.
The argument assumes that these two ideas are connected: that the
construction of a NON-LEAKING pipe will guarantee
a lack of pollution.
Answer choice B states this assumption:
Other than the possibility of a leak, there is no realistic pollution threat posed to the lake by the pipeline's construction.
If answer choice B is reversed -- in which case, it would say that
there is a HUGE pollution threat posed to the lake by the pipeline's construction -- the argument falls apart. Since the argument crumbles when B is reversed, we know that B is the necessary assumption:
what must be true for the conclusion of the argument to be valid.
Answer choice D, which discusses damage from a leak, is outside the scope. The argument is about a NON-LEAKING pipe.
The correct answer is
B.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at
[email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3