ankitvijay

OA.... not sure about the OA since this question is from other forum

Does Bolded part conflicts option B.......???

What about D.........

Advertisement: Each of the Economic Merit Prize winners from the past 25 years is covered by the Acme retirement plan. Since the winners of the nation’s most prestigious award for economists have thus clearly recognized that the Acme plan offers them a financially secure future, it is probably a good plan for anyone with retirement needs similar to theirs. The advertisement’s argumentation is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds? (A) It ignores the possibility that the majority of Economic Merit Prize winners from previous years used a retirement plan other than the Acme plan. (B) It fails to address adequately the possibility that any of several retirement plans would be good enough for, and offer a financially secure future to, Economic Merit Prize winners. © It appeals to the fact that supposed experts have endorsed the argument’s main conclusion, rather than appealing to direct evidence for that conclusion. (D) It takes for granted that some winners of the Economic Merit Prize have deliberately selected the Acme retirement plan, rather than having had it chosen for them by their employers. (E) It presumes, without providing justification, that each of the Economic Merit Prize winners has retirement plan needs that are identical to the advertisement’s intended audience’s retirement plan needs.

Political scientist: One of the most interesting dilemmas in contemporary democratic politics concerns the regulation of political campaign spending. People certainly should be free, within broad limits, to spend their money as they choose. On the other hand, candidates who can vastly outspend all rivals have an unfair advantage in publicizing their platforms. Democratic governments have a strong obligation to ensure that all voices have an equal chance to be heard, but governments should not subsidize expensive campaigns for each candidate. The resolution of the dilemma, therefore, is clear: _______. Which one of the following most logically completes the political scientist's argument? (A) only candidates with significant campaign resources should bepermitted to run for public office (B) an upper limit on the political campaign spending of each candidate is warranted © government subsidization of all political campaigns at a low percentage of their total cost is warranted (D) all wealthy persons should be prohibited from spending their own money on political campaigns (E) each candidate should be allowed to spend as much money on a political campaign as any other candidate chooses to spend

The phrase 'no news is good news' is a standard idiom in English Hence (A) is the correct answer.

Conclusion:if the warming continues, the guillemots' range will probably be enlarged by being extended northward along the coast. Conclusion talks about enlarging of the guillemots range....and if the food si not available due to warming....this wil not happen......... HTH

Guillemots are birds of Arctic regions. They feed on fish that gather beneath thin sheets of floating ice, and they nest on nearby land. Guillemots need 80 consecutive snow-free days in a year to raise their chicks, so until average temperatures in Arctic regions began to rise recently, the guillemots' range was limited to the southmost Arctic coast. Therefore, if the warming continues, the guillemots' range will probably be enlarged by being extended northward along the coast. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument ? A. Even if the the warming trend continues, there will be still years in which guillemots chicks are killed by an unusually early snow.This supports the arguement B. If the Arctic warming continues, guillemots' current prefators are likely to succeed in extending their own range farther north.So what....this doesnt weaken the argument C. Guillemots nest in coastal areas, where temperatures are generally higher than inland areas.Out of scope D. If the Arctic warming continues, much of the thin ice in the southern Arctic will disappear .fish will not be available which is the source of food and hence this weakens the argument...correct E. The fish the guillemots eat are currently preyed on by a wide variety of predators in the southernmost Arctic regions than they are farther north.This supports the argument

As the state legislature continues to debate whether to pass a new recycling law,its enormous financial toll on certain local industries has become primary concern. A same B the enormity of its financial toll C the enormous financial burden it has placed on D the financial toll such a law would take on E the enormous financial toll such a law would take with what does its modify in the sentence....according to me it modify recycling law...... OA...after discussion

In Option A....to identify food allergies, such as milk....means milk is a type of food allergy which is wrong..... i will go for E......but i dont have reason to negate B but that option E sounds better... OA..please...

OA.... can someone explain the usage of perfect tense in this sentence please....m still confused

845. The utility company has announced that it will permanently close its Unit I nuclear power plant, the first plant that had been built by private industry and the model for a generation of modern nuclear reactors. (A) that had been built by private industry and (B) built by private industry and which was © to be built by private industry and which was (D) built by private industry and (E) to have been built by private industry and was Can somebody tell me , why are we not using had been here, because the plant was built in the past and now it will get closed by company. Hence while answering had been would be the right choice. BUt it is not the case. While answering please talk about the usage of had been ...

thanx...MITZI......

How does option D changs the meaning.... Usage of have is correct in option D

OA....??