Critical Reasoning

Certain oil companies have been called poor corporate citizens because they have opposed government action to limit global warming by undermining scientific research that characterizes the issue as severe. However, these same oil companies have also invested millions of dollars in scientific research to address the long term effects of climate change.

Which of the following best explains the apparent discrepancy in the situation described above?
The oil companies only recently began investing in scientific research to address climate change issues.
The research dollars invested by the oil companies are specifically earmarked for developing practical technologies that might be used to combat global warming.
The government action opposed by the oil companies would negatively impact their profits.
The scientific research that characterizes global warming as a severe problem has not been definitively proven.
The oil companies don't believe that any scientific research related to climate change will ultimately serve their interests.

IMO-D

(D)

Obviously oil companies didn't believe the research at the first place so
oil companies are trying to see themselves how severe the impact of global warming /climate change is.

Nops it is not D.. Bidesha..

I think the answer is C
Since classifying the issue as severe could have direct monetary implications the companies are opposing it.

its not c either

My second guess would be (A)

Its B.

They invest for their business purpose (Their benifit) Hence discrepency solved

Bidisha800 wrote:My second guess would be (A)

nops, jeewan k got it

Jeewan, can you explain why A is correct?

D for me

Oil companies do invest in research their objection is to give the name "severe" to the research.
Else they would have supported the govt decision since they also spend on research

Jeewan, can you explain why A is correct?

Uma, First of all, Its not A. B is the correct answer as oA given by the owner of post Maihuna.

Explanation .

The beauty of "paradox" questions are , it generally goes against our
stimulus at first read.. The structure is always same.. just familiarize urself with it. It will contain two premises yielding two different results or conclusion. You have to find out a solution which justifies and explains the
two different results.


In this case,
1st premise - oil companies are against govt becos govt says global warming is a serious issue and hence they have initiated a probe of rsearch which may point its finger (thou not mentioned) on oil companies as culprits.

2nd premise- inspite of above ,oil companies are also spending money on technology which limits global warming ..

question - why so are they themselves doing while they are against the government (as 1st premise says).

Answer choice B indicates the oil companies motive in doing that. They are investing it as a part of their business which will generate profits in future (Not present but suggests). While they objected to govt planning becos that would no way benefit them or rather may be affected negatively.

B is a close choice compared to other choices. Hope it clarified ur doubt.

Nice explanation Jeevank........

Jeevan, thanks a lot. Even I got B. But didn't check maihuna's reply properly. BTW, good explanation. thanks.

(B)
Bidisha800, Drill baby drill! This is 700+ crap