BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

mgmat-oil deposit 600-700

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

mgmat-oil deposit 600-700

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:06 pm
An oil field prospector and developer reported a large oil deposit in southwestern Texas. As a result, a large oil and gas company purchased the field with the intention of drilling oil wells in the area soon afterwards. However, the company found that what had been reported to be a large oil deposit was actually much smaller than had been indicated. Thus, the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

The company's methods of measuring the size of the oil deposit were determined by a third party to be more accurate than those used by the prospector.

The prospector did not purposefully fabricate or misrepresent the size of the oil deposit.
Though smaller than originally thought, the oil deposit contained enough oil to make drilling commercially feasible.
The prospector did not explore other oil fields and use the same methods to determine the magnitude of the oil
present,
if any.
The company had successfully drilled for oil in other large oil fields in Texas throughout the early twentieth century.

why E is not correct and what is correct answer in your opinion
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
Thanked: 135 times
Followed by:7 members

by selango » Mon Jul 12, 2010 10:22 pm
IMO A.

Negate Option E.It does not weaken the conclusion the argument.

Negate option A.It weakens the argument.If company method of findings is not accurate,how can they say prospector finding is inaccurate?
--Anand--
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 6:33 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by vijaynaik » Mon Jul 12, 2010 10:51 pm
I agree with selango's reasoning. It's A.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Mon Jul 12, 2010 11:38 pm
no way A can nt be the asumption . u are far away from oa. plz try again
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pm
Thanked: 215 times
Followed by:7 members

by kvcpk » Mon Jul 12, 2010 11:57 pm
IMO B.

There was a flase report from prospector. What could be the reasons:
1) Either the method he used to report was false
2) He must have manipulated the reports.

The last statement of the passage says that only 1) is possible. Which means that it assumes 2) is not possible.

hence pick B.
We can do the same with Denial test also.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Tue Jul 13, 2010 2:33 am
kvcpk i will hold for oa for more opinions
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 6:33 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by vijaynaik » Tue Jul 13, 2010 9:47 am
After reading a lot :-) I think it's D.

D says that the propepector didn't do this before. If they did then they would have realized that their methods were wrong. Based on this assumption authors says that the prospector's method were not accurate.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 278
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Bangalore,India
Thanked: 17 times

by loveusonu » Tue Jul 13, 2010 10:35 am
pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:An oil field prospector and developer reported a large oil deposit in southwestern Texas. As a result, a large oil and gas company purchased the field with the intention of drilling oil wells in the area soon afterwards. However, the company found that what had been reported to be a large oil deposit was actually much smaller than had been indicated. Thus, the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

The company's methods of measuring the size of the oil deposit were determined by a third party to be more accurate than those used by the prospector.

The prospector did not purposefully fabricate or misrepresent the size of the oil deposit.
Though smaller than originally thought, the oil deposit contained enough oil to make drilling commercially feasible.
The prospector did not explore other oil fields and use the same methods to determine the magnitude of the oil
present,
if any.
The company had successfully drilled for oil in other large oil fields in Texas throughout the early twentieth century.

why E is not correct and what is correct answer in your opinion
Should be B...here's why?

Conclusion:The methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.
Evidence: Company found the reserves much smaller than what has been reported by prospector.
Missing GAP: No other reason apart from Incorrect Method has been responsible for this result.

B:The prospector did not purposefully fabricate or misrepresent the size of the oil deposit. -->Author needs to assume this or else he can't take out conclusion that Method was incorrect.

E: OUT of Scope... Even though they had drilled successfully in other oil fields, doesn't apply anything to this failure.

Hope that helps!!
Sonu
--------
When you want something desperately, the whole Universe conspires in helping to give it to you - The Alchemist
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:54 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:3 members

by outreach » Tue Jul 13, 2010 11:36 am
a. the third party is not needed. it is affirmed that prospector predictions was more than actual deposits

b.correct
conclusion is there that prospector predictions was more than actual deposits and prospector was looking for personal gain

c. this is not an assumption

d.out of scope

e.this is not imp bcz company's measurements of the size of
the oil field are accepted as given in the argument
-------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
General blog
https://amarnaik.wordpress.com
MBA blog
https://amarrnaik.blocked/
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 8:50 am
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:3 members

by diebeatsthegmat » Tue Jul 13, 2010 4:58 pm
pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:An oil field prospector and developer reported a large oil deposit in southwestern Texas. As a result, a large oil and gas company purchased the field with the intention of drilling oil wells in the area soon afterwards. However, the company found that what had been reported to be a large oil deposit was actually much smaller than had been indicated. Thus, the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

The company's methods of measuring the size of the oil deposit were determined by a third party to be more accurate than those used by the prospector.

The prospector did not purposefully fabricate or misrepresent the size of the oil deposit.
Though smaller than originally thought, the oil deposit contained enough oil to make drilling commercially feasible.
The prospector did not explore other oil fields and use the same methods to determine the magnitude of the oil
present,
if any.
The company had successfully drilled for oil in other large oil fields in Texas throughout the early twentieth century.

why E is not correct and what is correct answer in your opinion
i chose D
what is the answer?
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Tue Jul 13, 2010 7:42 pm
I am debating between A and B. I choose A at first but as you are saying that A is not a correct option I have to choose B. But I still think A could be better option. What is the OA?
pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:An oil field prospector and developer reported a large oil deposit in southwestern Texas. As a result, a large oil and gas company purchased the field with the intention of drilling oil wells in the area soon afterwards. However, the company found that what had been reported to be a large oil deposit was actually much smaller than had been indicated. Thus, the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

The company's methods of measuring the size of the oil deposit were determined by a third party to be more accurate than those used by the prospector.

The prospector did not purposefully fabricate or misrepresent the size of the oil deposit.
Though smaller than originally thought, the oil deposit contained enough oil to make drilling commercially feasible.
The prospector did not explore other oil fields and use the same methods to determine the magnitude of the oil
present,
if any.
The company had successfully drilled for oil in other large oil fields in Texas throughout the early twentieth century.

why E is not correct and what is correct answer in your opinion
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:46 pm
yes oa is B.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1