Doubt in Greg Medium Timed Section Tests I Sample#4

GRE Verbal Problem Solving
1

Hi!

I have a doubt in this CR passage:

image
image1247Ă—793 93.4 KB

My logic:

  • I selected #1 here- logic being that the primary argument by the author on why we should stop illegal mining is pollution, which is impacting health and environment. This answer states how mercury is NOT harming the aquatic life in the lakes/ rivers, and is therefore not harmful to environment and public health (if fish not impacted, people also not impacted- my interpretation).
  • The reason I did not choose #3 was- just because a polluting substance can be extracted, does not mean it shouldn’t be stopped to prevent pollution in the first place.

Why is this logic wrong, can you please explain?

Thanks in advance!

2

You gotta pick the one that most weakens.

For the first one, just because fish are not harmed, you cannot assume that the environment is not harmed at all.

Point 3 is explaining a way that we can prevent damage to environmental and public health without stopping the gold mining, which directly contradicts the conclusion of the passage that it must be stopped.

That said, this is a GregMat question so the logic might not be as tight as an ETS question.

3

Gotcha, understood. Thanks for your guidance!

1 Like