#24 - Critics of a plan to create new building sites from

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below! Thank you!

[lathlee]

Hi. I got this Question right but i didn't know this was even Must be true Q. I thought it was MP so I would like to know why b) is the correct answer.

[allicr]

Hi. I got this Question right but i didn't know this was even Must be true Q. I thought it was MP so I would like to know why b) is the correct answer.

Hey lathlee, I see you posted this a while ago, but in case you didn't find an answer, I came here as I originally got this one wrong but think I understand why B is correct now.

The critics' conclusion is that the new building site will reduce the habitat available to the local dolphin population. However, this rests on the premise that dolphins actually inhabit an area with only 5 m of water. B provides information against this premise by saying the dolphins don't inhabit water that is less than 10 m deep. Therefore, the dolphins wouldn't have been inhabiting the area in the first place and the building site wouldn't be taking away their habitat. This is why the critics are mistaken.

[Malila Robinson]

Hi Lathlee,
A Main Point question is asking for the main conclusion of the argument. The stimulus asks you to fill in the "because" part of the argument. 'Because' is a premise indicator, not a conclusion indicator, so this would be a Must Be True question, not a Main Point question.
As for why B is correct Allicr's reasoning seems to be on point. The argument tells us that the land in question is 5 meters deep in the water, and dolphins will not go in water that is more than 30 meters deep. If B were added to the stimulus it would mean that dolphins will inhabit water that is 10-30 meters deep. The land in question is 5 meters deep. And land in water that is 5 meters deep is not in the range that dolphins inhabit (10-30 meters) so the land should be ok to use.
Hope that helps!
-Malila

[lldiez]

I just don't quite understand why it is not answer choice A. I didn't love it but it seemed better than the rest. I thought that the author stating the critic's premises was done in good faith, and if they knew the premise to be untrue, they would have stated it as such. I eliminated B because I felt it would have gone against the premises in the stimulus. Additionally, the description of the land being entirely surrounded by water deeper than 30m, where the author acknowledges dolphins cannot live seemed to negate the possibility of this local subpopulation being able to exist locally at all.

[Jeremy Press]

Hi lldiez,

The reason answer choice A doesn't work here is that it is irrelevant to the critics' claim, which the author of the argument is trying to prove is "mistaken." The critics' claim is that the building plan "will reduce the habitat area available" to a subpopulation of dolphins. The author of the argument thinks this claim is mistaken. Answer choice A does not address the total habitat area (the amount of space) that is available to the dolphins. Instead it addresses the number of dolphins that can live within a particular habitat area. If the critics were claiming that the plan would reduce the population of dolphins inhabiting the area, then answer choice A would become relevant.

I think you might've misread this part of the stimulus: "It is true that the dolphins never enter water more than 30 meters deep." I think you're reading that sentence to suggest that dolphins don't live in (or enter) water that is 0-30 meters deep. Rather, what that sentence is saying is that dolphins don't live in or enter water that is 31 meters (or more) deep. So answer choice B is actually consistent with the stimulus. It suggests (combined with the premise in the stimulus) that dolphins would enter and inhabit water that is between 11 and 30 meters deep. If this proposal only gets rid of waters that are 5 meters deep or less, that would have no effect on the areas these dolphins would enter and live in.

I hope this helps!

[lldiez]

Hi lldiez,

The reason answer choice A doesn't work here is that it is irrelevant to the critics' claim, which the author of the argument is trying to prove is "mistaken." The critics' claim is that the building plan "will reduce the habitat area available" to a subpopulation of dolphins. The author of the argument thinks this claim is mistaken. Answer choice A does not address the total habitat area (the amount of space) that is available to the dolphins. Instead it addresses the number of dolphins that can live within a particular habitat area. If the critics were claiming that the plan would reduce the population of dolphins inhabiting the area, then answer choice A would become relevant.

I think you might've misread this part of the stimulus: "It is true that the dolphins never enter water more than 30 meters deep." I think you're reading that sentence to suggest that dolphins don't live in (or enter) water that is 0-30 meters deep. Rather, what that sentence is saying is that dolphins don't live in or enter water that is 31 meters (or more) deep. So answer choice B is actually consistent with the stimulus. It suggests (combined with the premise in the stimulus) that dolphins would enter and inhabit water that is between 11 and 30 meters deep. If this proposal only gets rid of waters that are 5 meters deep or less, that would have no effect on the areas these dolphins would enter and live in.

I hope this helps!

Thank you so much for the explanation!

[ArizonaRobin]

Hi lldiez,

The reason answer choice A doesn't work here is that it is irrelevant to the critics' claim, which the author of the argument is trying to prove is "mistaken." The critics' claim is that the building plan "will reduce the habitat area available" to a subpopulation of dolphins. The author of the argument thinks this claim is mistaken. Answer choice A does not address the total habitat area (the amount of space) that is available to the dolphins. Instead it addresses the number of dolphins that can live within a particular habitat area. If the critics were claiming that the plan would reduce the population of dolphins inhabiting the area, then answer choice A would become relevant.

I think you might've misread this part of the stimulus: "It is true that the dolphins never enter water more than 30 meters deep." I think you're reading that sentence to suggest that dolphins don't live in (or enter) water that is 0-30 meters deep. Rather, what that sentence is saying is that dolphins don't live in or enter water that is 31 meters (or more) deep. So answer choice B is actually consistent with the stimulus. It suggests (combined with the premise in the stimulus) that dolphins would enter and inhabit water that is between 11 and 30 meters deep. If this proposal only gets rid of waters that are 5 meters deep or less, that would have no effect on the areas these dolphins would enter and live in.

I hope this helps!

Thank you for this, Jeremy. I totally made that mistaken reading of entering meters more than 30 meters deep. It seemed like B was just restating another premise, which didn't make sense for an answer choice.