-
nikita_khanna95
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2016 12:22 am
Premise:
In 2005, Maltania's WFPI was 60 pounds more than Italy's WFPI.
In 2006, Maltania's WFPI was 75 pounds more than Italy's WFPI.
Conclusion:
Between 2005 and 2006, Maltania's WFPI increased.
Case 1:
In 2005, Italy's WFPI = 100, Maltania's WFPI = 100+60 = 160.
In 2006, Italy's WFPI = 10, Maltania's WFPI = 10+75 = 85.
In this case, Maltania's WFPI decreases from 160 to 85.
To support the conclusion that Maltania's WFPI increased, the correct answer will probably show that Case 1 is not possible.
C: Between 2005 and 2006, Italy's WFPI decreased by 10 pounds per acre.
Here, Case 1 is not possible, since in Case 1 Italy's WFPI decreases by 90 pounds per acre.
Case 2:
In 2005, Italy's WFPI = 100, Maltania's WFPI = 100+60 = 160.
In 2006, Italy's WFPI = 100-10 = 90, Maltania's WFPI = 90+75 = 165.
In this case, Maltania's WFPI increases from 160 to 165.
Case 3:
In 2005, Italy's WFPI = 20, Maltania's WFPI = 20+60 = 80.
In 2006, Italy's WFPI = 20-10 = 10, Maltania's WFPI = 10+75 = 85.
In this case, Maltania's WFPI increases from 80 to 85.
In both cases, Maltania's WFPI increases by 5 pounds per acre.
Thus, the information in C SUPPORTS the conclusion that Maltania's WFPI increased.
The correct answer is C.


















