Q 222

[Nycgrl]

222.Contrary to earlier conjectures, it may be that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide as a result of burning fossil fuels would cool the globe by reducing the amount of solar energy absorbed by snow.

(A) increased atmospheric carbon dioxide as a result of burning
(B) increased atmospheric carbon dioxide resulting from the combustion of
(C) increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere resulting from the combustion of
(D) carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that increase from burning
(E) atmospheric carbon dioxide that increased from burning


What's wrong with c

[senthil]

I feel the answer is B


what is OA ?

[codesnooker]

Is OA (A).

B) increased and resulting verbs are not parallel.
C) Now increased and resulting verbs have symmetry but they change the original meaning of the sentence as it turns the sentence into continuous form.
D) Placement of increase verb, is changing the meaning of original sentence.

Now left with choices (A) and (E). I am confused between these two choice and will go with wild guess with (A).

What is OA?

[senthil]

I feel the answer is B .

[pranavc]

It's either A or B. I am going with A. What is the correct answer?

[lunarpower]

(b) is the best of the bunch here.

the only other serious contenders would appear to be (a) and (c), so let's treat those.

(a)
you can't use "as a result of" to modify a noun; it can only modify a clause. for instance, you can say
carbon dioxide levels increased as a result of...
but you can't say
the carbon dioxide as a result of ... did this.

(c)
* wordy in comparison to (b)
* because there's no comma before the modifier resulting from the combustion..., that modifier technically modifies the adjacent noun atmosphere. that's nonsense, of course: the atmosphere didn't result from the combustion of fossil fuels (not to mention that this writing suggests the existence of more than one atmosphere).

--

nb: like many other 1000sc problems, this one features subpar writing that would probably not be tolerated on the real gmat.
in particular, the gmat would probably consider increased atmospheric carbon dioxide wrong, because carbon dioxide itself can't "increase"; the correct wording would be increased atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.

[reachac]

Me too for B,

Pretty odd construction though in all the choices, using both "may be" and "would" is redundant

[kiranlegend]

IMO B or C.. but will go with B

what is OA?

[bornsupreme]

(b) is the best of the bunch here.

the only other serious contenders would appear to be (a) and (c), so let's treat those.

(a)
you can't use "as a result of" to modify a noun; it can only modify a clause. for instance, you can say
carbon dioxide levels increased as a result of...
but you can't say
the carbon dioxide as a result of ... did this.

(c)
* wordy in comparison to (b)
* because there's no comma before the modifier resulting from the combustion..., that modifier technically modifies the adjacent noun atmosphere. that's nonsense, of course: the atmosphere didn't result from the combustion of fossil fuels (not to mention that this writing suggests the existence of more than one atmosphere).

--

nb: like many other 1000sc problems, this one features subpar writing that would probably not be tolerated on the real gmat.
in particular, the gmat would probably consider increased atmospheric carbon dioxide wrong, because carbon dioxide itself can't "increase"; the correct wording would be increased atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.

Hi Ron,
You Wrote that it wrong to write"carbon dioxide as a result of".

Based on that is the below statement correct or not-"increased carbon dioxide levels as a result of"
here 'as a result of is modifying what'??

Please explain.

Thanks.