option 5 for Q2 because it says that only 7% of people who consume meat and dairy products regularly suffer heart attacks over the course of their lifetime thereby suggesting that consuming these is not a big health risk and reducing the intake of these would not reduce the risk of heart attacks. Q1 The reason being given for the termites dying quickly on first and second floors is the pumping of gas into the walls. Option 2 weakens this argument by saying that the termites on the 4th floor died quickly as well despite gas not being pumped into the walls.
P.S. I seem to have really messed up the answer to Q2 even after changing my choice of answer.:)
I too think answer to Q2 is 3.We are supposed to choose that option that weakens the argument the most.The question states 10% of ppl whose diets include dairy and meat products sufffer HA.While option 5 states that 7% of them do.So what is the big difference.
Whereas option 3 states that even ppl who do not eat dairy or meat products suffer a heart attack,which directly weakens the argument by stating that the reducing meat or dairy in the diets is not going to prevent HA.
I too think answer to Q2 is 3.We are supposed to choose that option that weakens the argument the most.The question states 10% of ppl whose diets include dairy and meat products sufffer HA.While option 5 states that 7% of them do.So what is the big difference.
Whereas option 3 states that even ppl who do not eat dairy or meat products suffer a heart attack,which directly weakens the argument by stating that the reducing meat or dairy in the diets is not going to prevent HA.
hi, I will try to explain this somewhat: You need to look at what the conclusion is. The conclusion is that "a diet that is free of meat and dairy products greatly reduces the risk of suffering a heart attack" and the only premise used for this conclusion is the fact that "only 10% of those who consume such a diet suffer a heart attack at some point in their lives". (Note that the order in this question is reversed. Logically one wud expect the premise first and then the conclusion.)
Now option 5 destroys this conclusion by saying that only 7% of ppl who regularly have meat/dairy suffer heart attacks whereas the question-guy has admitted that this number is 10% for ppl not eating meat/dairy. This might seem like a very easy solution but theres no question that option 5 calls the question-guy a blatant liar by saying that he did not care to check out the chances of heart attacks in meat/dairy eaters, and made a half-blind conclusion. Option 3 might sound enticing, but it says that "Some people....". What would the question guy say if you argued with option 3? He would say "Yes..maybe some ppl get heart attacks inspite of not eating meat/dairy. I never said that if you dont eat meat/dairy you will never get a heart attack, did I?" But option 5 will shut him up for good. Hope this helps.
Note:I have assumed that "at some point in their lives" and "over the course of their lifetime" mean the same thing- which is a safe assumption.;)
1.Bill: Smoke-detecting fire alarms can save lives. I believe that every apartment in this city should be required by law to be equipped with a smoke detector. Joe: I disagree with your proposal. Smoke detectors are just as important for safety in private houses as they are in apartment. From this exchange, it can be inferred that Joe has interpreted Bills statement to mean that (A) the city should be responsible for providing smoke detectors for apartments (B) residences outside the city should not be equipped with smoke detectors (C) only apartments should be equipped with smoke detectors (D) the risk of fire is not as great in private houses as it is in apartments (E) the rate of death by fire is unusually high in the city in question
2.In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography. Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989? (A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988. (B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented. (C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful. (D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures. (E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area.
1.Bill: Smoke-detecting fire alarms can save lives. I believe that every apartment in this city should be required by law to be equipped with a smoke detector. Joe: I disagree with your proposal. Smoke detectors are just as important for safety in private houses as they are in apartment. From this exchange, it can be inferred that Joe has interpreted Bills statement to mean that (A) the city should be responsible for providing smoke detectors for apartments (B) residences outside the city should not be equipped with smoke detectors (C) only apartments should be equipped with smoke detectors (D) the risk of fire is not as great in private houses as it is in apartments (E) the rate of death by fire is unusually high in the city in question
2.In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography. Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989? (A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988. (B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented. (C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful. (D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures. (E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area.
OAs are C & B.......could u pls explain first one........
Q1 says hw had joe interpreted bill's statement. bill said tht smoke detectors are necessary in every apartment which also meant private houses, while joe interpreted this as smoke detectors required only for apartments n not for private houses which are equally susceptible to fire related hazards and hence his argument.
hw cud OA to q2 be B? if a new gas spectrometer was invented in dec 1988, then no,. of smog alerts wud hv reduced the following yr which is true (it did drop to 16 in 1989). does this mean tht invention and actual enforcement of this new spectrometer did not tk place simultaneously?
Q1 says hw had joe interpreted bill's statement. bill said tht smoke detectors are necessary in every apartment which also meant private houses, while joe interpreted this as smoke detectors required only for apartments n not for private houses which are equally susceptible to fire related hazards and hence his argument.
hw cud OA to q2 be B? if a new gas spectrometer was invented in dec 1988, then no,. of smog alerts wud hv reduced the following yr which is true (it did drop to 16 in 1989). does this mean tht invention and actual enforcement of this new spectrometer did not tk place simultaneously?
pl clarify my doubt 4 q2.
thanks
I think only discovered but not applied the new spectrometer in 1989......
I think only discovered but not applied the new spectrometer in 1989......
Yes,I think that is why .Invention doesn't imply application of the same in the city of Los Diablos.Other choices are more related to the reason so B is LEAST helpful.
The GMAT and Related Discussions section is very fragmented in terms of the information available at one's disposal. There are one of reply threads and several other redundant threads that have masked the more important ones.
This is an attempt to make the best of explanations, reasonings, questions etc etc easily available to the junta here. We would be having separate threads for topics such as
Please ensure that Q & As are carried out in the repsective threads.
Thread is made sticky
PS:-This post would be edited by the MODS in order to give links to various CRs that would be discussed here. We will try to organise the links for the questions discussed here. Other relevant posts in the 'one of reply' threads would be moved here
Hi Can you please guide me abt the latest materials available for GMAT preparation.
Following is a very very enlightening and helpful post by aims-wsc for new-bies, go throught it, hopefully it will resolve all your queries - http://www.pagalguy.com/forum/gmat-and-related-discussions/24311-gmat-prep-material-53.html#post667433
the reason why the answer is B is that the Spectrometer is only used for monitoring (measuring) the pollution levels...invention of a new one will just give more accurate results but has no role to play in increasing/decresing the levels of pollutions...
Which of the following best completes the passage below?
At large amusement parks, live shows are used very deliberately to influence crowd movements. Lunchtime performances relieve the pressure on a park's restaurants. Evening performances have a rather different purpose: to encourage visitors to stay for supper. Behind this surface divergence in immediate purpose there is the unified underlying goal of______
(A) keeping the lines at the various rides short by drawing off part of the crowd (B) enhancing revenue by attracting people who come only for the live shows and then leave the park (C) avoiding as far as possible traffic jams caused by visitors entering or leaving the park (D) encouraging as many people as possible to come to the park in order to eat at the restaurants (E) utilizing the restaurants at optimal levels for as much of the day as possible
Which of the following best completes the passage below?
At large amusement parks, live shows are used very deliberately to influence crowd movements. Lunchtime performances relieve the pressure on a park's restaurants. Evening performances have a rather different purpose: to encourage visitors to stay for supper. Behind this surface divergence in immediate purpose there is the unified underlying goal of______
(A) keeping the lines at the various rides short by drawing off part of the crowd (B) enhancing revenue by attracting people who come only for the live shows and then leave the park (C) avoiding as far as possible traffic jams caused by visitors entering or leaving the park (D) encouraging as many people as possible to come to the park in order to eat at the restaurants (E) utilizing the restaurants at optimal levels for as much of the day as possible
Which of the following best completes the passage below?
At large amusement parks, live shows are used very deliberately to influence crowd movements. Lunchtime performances relieve the pressure on a parks restaurants. Evening performances have a rather different purpose: to encourage visitors to stay for supper. Behind this surface divergence in immediate purpose there is the unified underlying goal of______
(A) keeping the lines at the various rides short by drawing off part of the crowd (B) enhancing revenue by attracting people who come only for the live shows and then leave the park (C) avoiding as far as possible traffic jams caused by visitors entering or leaving the park (D) encouraging as many people as possible to come to the park in order to eat at the restaurants (E) utilizing the restaurants at optimal levels for as much of the day as possible
I think the answer should be E.
The statement says that purpose of live shows in day time is to reduce the crowd at restaurnats for lunch and in evening live shows make people stay late in the park and have the supper in the restaurants. So, we can say that the main purpose of these live shows is to utlize the restaurant to the optimal level for as much of the day as possible.
The statement says that purpose of live shows in day time is to reduce the crowd at restaurnats for lunch and in evening live shows make people stay late in the park and have the supper in the restaurants. So, we can say that the main purpose of these live shows is to utlize the restaurant to the optimal level for as much of the day as possible.
Whats the OA ?
My pick is E. afternoon sessions help relieve pressure on restaurants while evening performances are meant to hold crowd back till supper. Under both conditions, the capacity and services offered by restaurants is optimised, which is in fact the purpose of these performances.
Q22. Springfield Fire Commissioner: the vast majority of false fire alarms are prank calls made anonymously from fire alarm boxes on street corners. Since virtually everyone has access to a private telephone, these alarm boxes have outlived their usefulness. Therefore, we propose to remove the boxes. Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire. Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, will have the announced effect? A. The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from. B. Maintaining the fire alarm boxes costs Springfield approximately five million dollars annually. C. A telephone call can provide the fire department with more information about the nature and size of a fire than can an alarm placed from an alarm box. D. Responding to false alarms significantly reduces the fire department's capacity for responding to fires. E. On any given day, a significant percentage of the public telephones in Springfield are out of service.
Q22. Springfield Fire Commissioner: the vast majority of false fire alarms are prank calls made anonymously from fire alarm boxes on street corners. Since virtually everyone has access to a private telephone, these alarm boxes have outlived their usefulness. Therefore, we propose to remove the boxes. Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire. Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, will have the announced effect? A. The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from. B. Maintaining the fire alarm boxes costs Springfield approximately five million dollars annually. C. A telephone call can provide the fire department with more information about the nature and size of a fire than can an alarm placed from an alarm box. D. Responding to false alarms significantly reduces the fire department's capacity for responding to fires. E. On any given day, a significant percentage of the public telephones in Springfield are out of service.
