BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course
Redeem
Featured Course
Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand
Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.
- 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
- 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
- 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
- 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
- 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
- TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
- 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
- OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
- Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
- MBA Admissions Consulting now available
- 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
- 200,000+ students served
- 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★
5.0
(559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start
then $127/mo
toghie!!!
Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning |
I think the answer is B - because thats the only option that articulates the inference - of some environmentalists supporting environmental sustainability by non economic means.
IMO also B
A The paragraph does not say the it is economically imprudent to exploit features of the env. It just says that some environmentalists question its prudence. Option A makes strong statement which cannot be proved by the given facts.
B This point is clearly mentioned in the paragraph. By the way in CR 'many' means 'some' and not 'most'
C Again the facts talk about only some environmentalists and not most of them.
D The paragraph does not say that the only justification provided by the latter group of environmentalists is non economic. It is just one of the reasons not the only reason. Again a very strong statement not supported by the given facts.
E Again the facts don't prove that the non economic justification is sound or not. Nothing about its soundness is mentioned.
Hope the explanation is clear
A The paragraph does not say the it is economically imprudent to exploit features of the env. It just says that some environmentalists question its prudence. Option A makes strong statement which cannot be proved by the given facts.
B This point is clearly mentioned in the paragraph. By the way in CR 'many' means 'some' and not 'most'
C Again the facts talk about only some environmentalists and not most of them.
D The paragraph does not say that the only justification provided by the latter group of environmentalists is non economic. It is just one of the reasons not the only reason. Again a very strong statement not supported by the given facts.
E Again the facts don't prove that the non economic justification is sound or not. Nothing about its soundness is mentioned.
Hope the explanation is clear
