-
max37274
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:03 am
- Thanked: 2 times
- Followed by:1 members
The fishing industry cannot currently be relied upon to help the government count the seabirds killed by net fishing, since an accurate count might result in restriction of net fishing. The government should therefore institute a program under which tissue samples from the dead birds are examined to determine the amount of toxins in the fish eaten by the birds. The industry would then have a reason to turn in the bird carcasses, since the industry needs to know whether the fish it catches are contaminated with toxins.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) The seabirds that are killed by net fishing do not eat all of the species of fish caught by the fishing industry
(B) The government has not in the past sought to determine whether fish were contaminated with toxins by examining tissue samples of seabirds
(C) The government cannot gain an accurate count of the number of seabirds killed by net fishing unless the fishing industry cooperates
(D) If the government knew that fish caught by the fishing industry were contaminated by toxins, the government would restrict net fishing
(E) If net fishing were restricted by the government, then the fishing industry ¡¡¡¡would become more inclined to reveal the number of seabirds killed by net fishing.
Which one of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that the government program would not by itself provide an accurate count of the seabirds killed by net fishing?
(A) The seabirds killed by net fishing might be contaminated with several different toxins even if the birds eat only one kind of fish
(B) The fishing industry could learn whether the fish it catches are contaminated with toxins if only a few of the seabirds killed by the nets were examined
(C) The government could gain valuable information about the source of toxins by examining tissue samples of the seabirds caught in the nets.
(D) The fish caught in a particular net might be contaminated with the same toxins as those in the seabirds caught in that net.
(E) The government would be willing to certify that the fish caught by the industry are not contaminated with toxins if tests done on the seabirds showed no contamination
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) The seabirds that are killed by net fishing do not eat all of the species of fish caught by the fishing industry
(B) The government has not in the past sought to determine whether fish were contaminated with toxins by examining tissue samples of seabirds
(C) The government cannot gain an accurate count of the number of seabirds killed by net fishing unless the fishing industry cooperates
(D) If the government knew that fish caught by the fishing industry were contaminated by toxins, the government would restrict net fishing
(E) If net fishing were restricted by the government, then the fishing industry ¡¡¡¡would become more inclined to reveal the number of seabirds killed by net fishing.
Which one of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that the government program would not by itself provide an accurate count of the seabirds killed by net fishing?
(A) The seabirds killed by net fishing might be contaminated with several different toxins even if the birds eat only one kind of fish
(B) The fishing industry could learn whether the fish it catches are contaminated with toxins if only a few of the seabirds killed by the nets were examined
(C) The government could gain valuable information about the source of toxins by examining tissue samples of the seabirds caught in the nets.
(D) The fish caught in a particular net might be contaminated with the same toxins as those in the seabirds caught in that net.
(E) The government would be willing to certify that the fish caught by the industry are not contaminated with toxins if tests done on the seabirds showed no contamination
