Critical Reasoning

The report released by the interior ministry states that within the past 5 years the national land-reclamation program has created a 19 percent increase in arable land within the country. If these figures are accurate, the program has been a huge success. Senator Cox, a distinguished mathematician and a woman of brilliance, maintains, however, that the reclamation program could not possibly have been successful. Clearly, therefore, the figures cited in the report cannot be accurate. The argument above exhibits an erroneous pattern of reasoning most similar to that exhibited by which one of the following?

A) Albert's father claims that Albert does not know where the spare car keys are hidden. Yesterday however, Albert reported that he had discovered the spare car keys in the garage toolbox, so his father's claim cannot be true.

B) Gloria's drama teacher claims that her policy is to give each student the opportunity to act in at least one play during the year but, since Gloria, who attended every class, reports that she was not given such an opportunity the teacher's claim cannot be true.

C) Amos claims that he can hold his breath under water for a full hour. Dr. Treviso, a cardiopulmonary specialist, has stated that humans are physiologically incapable of holding their breath for even half that long; so Amos' claim cannot be true.

D) Evelyn reports that she got home before midnight. Robert, who always knows the time, insists that she did not. If Robert is right, Evelyn could not possibly have listened to the late news; since she admits not having listened to the late news, her report cannot be true.

E) Moira, after observing the finish of the 60-kilometer bicycle race, reports that Lee won with Adams a distant third. Lomas, a bicycle engineering expert, insists, however, that Lee could not have won a race in which Adams competed; so Moira's report cannot be true.

E is the best answer...

i too feel its E

IMO E

E for me also.

Pls do not forget to post OA

OA is E, but i feel C is also close

appriciate if someone can compare C and E and why E is better.

To me C is a claim (its just a claim, we don't know whether he ever did or not) and its disputed by a research scientist

E is a report of an action similar to the original argument. So some thing happened and she reported it. There is a proof that it happened and Moira watched it. The expert is saying that it is wrong and cannot happen. Probably Moira screwed up just like the people in original report might have

On a side note. Its my understanding that erroneous pattern of reasoning is not a GMAT Q but LSAT Q. Can you please confirm? If you are trying to sharpen the brains its good.

chidcguy wrote:On a side note. Its my understanding that erroneous pattern of reasoning is not a GMAT Q but LSAT Q. Can you please confirm? If you are trying to sharpen the brains its good.

Thanks. The problem is from 800score.com test. i got it wrong and wasnt satisfied with the OE (below)

(E) This argument uses the 'appeal to authority' fallacy. This is when someone's credentials automatically establish something as fact and negate any opposing arguments. A, B and D do not use appeals to authority. The two choices that improperly use an appeal are (C) and (E). (E) is better because it more closely resembles the passage because it attempts to use the information to negate an argument already made.

I am at times confused with such type of question. Experts can you please show me how to deduce correct information from such type of argument,in which we have to find the analogy between the argument and the answer choice.

One of the reason for me to reach the correct answer choice E is that the argument has two conclusions /viewpoints each refuting other from two persons and one of the person is an expert in his field.

So the finally I penned down to answer choice E.

Please let me know whether my process of answer selection is right.
Guide me with some useful techniques to solve such interesting problems.