Archaeologist: Researchers excavating a burial site in Cyprus found a feline skeleton lying near a human skeleton. Both skeletons were in the same sediment at the same depth and equally well-preserved, suggesting that the feline and human were buried together about 9,500 years ago. This shows that felines were domesticated around the time farming began, when they would have been useful in protecting stores of grain from mice.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the archaeologist's argument?
(A) Archaeologists have not found any remains of stores of grain in the immediate vicinity of the burial site.
(B) The burial site in Cyprus is substantially older than any other known burial site in which a feline skeleton and a human skeleton appear to have been buried together.
(C) Paintings found near the burial site seem to show people keeping felines as domestic companions, but do not show felines hunting mice.
(D) In Cyprus, there are many burial sites dating from around 9,500 years ago in which the remains of wild animals appear to have been buried alongside human remains.
(E) Before felines were domesticated, early farmers had no effective way to protect stores of grain from mice.
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
GMAT OG, Archaeologist: Researchers excavating a burial site
This topic has expert replies
-
kennethbbb
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 10:37 am
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
Ian Stewart
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2621
- Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:17 am
- Location: Montreal
- Thanked: 1090 times
- Followed by:355 members
- GMAT Score:780
The argument essentially says: "a cat was buried with a person. Therefore the cat was domesticated." There's a huge leap in that argument - why does "buried with a person" mean "domesticated"? It's only a good argument if we know that an animal will be buried alongside a person only when that animal is domesticated.
So D is the right answer, because it exposes the gap in the argument: if "wild" (non-domesticated) animals were routinely buried alongside people, then we can't tell if an animal is wild or domesticated if we find it buried next to a person.
It's a really well-written question, especially because so many of the answer choices are tempting at first glance. There's an underlying structure to the argument that is quite common on the GMAT - the argument jumps from one category ('buried together') to another ('domesticated'), and tries to trick you into thinking those two categories are the same thing - so it's a worthwhile question to study.
So D is the right answer, because it exposes the gap in the argument: if "wild" (non-domesticated) animals were routinely buried alongside people, then we can't tell if an animal is wild or domesticated if we find it buried next to a person.
It's a really well-written question, especially because so many of the answer choices are tempting at first glance. There's an underlying structure to the argument that is quite common on the GMAT - the argument jumps from one category ('buried together') to another ('domesticated'), and tries to trick you into thinking those two categories are the same thing - so it's a worthwhile question to study.
For online GMAT math tutoring, or to buy my higher-level Quant books and problem sets, contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com
ianstewartgmat.com
ianstewartgmat.com
