medium · GMAT Verbal
A city's air quality index improved from 'moderate' to 'good' in the same year it banned wood-burning stoves in new residential construction. City officials argue that the wood-stove ban is clearly responsible for the improvement, since no other environmental regulation was passed that year.
Which of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the officials' reasoning?
- It ignores that air quality could have improved for a non-regulatory reason, like weather.
- It fails to define precisely what counts as a 'moderate' versus a 'good' air quality index.
- It presumes that residential construction is a significant contributor to a city's overall air quality.
- It fails to consider whether the ban was difficult for builders to comply with.
- It fails to consider whether other cities have also banned wood-burning stoves in new construction.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More GMAT Verbal practice
- What logical role do the first two statements play?
- Which of the following is the conclusion?
- A gardener says: 'All roses in this garden require daily wat… — What is the role of the st
- What is the conclusion?
- What is the conclusion?
- Which statement is the conclusion?
- What is the conclusion?
- What logical role does the first sentence play in the researcher's argument?