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

Redeem

CR-1000 Test-1 Q-20

Expert replies
by neha.patni » Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:02 am
Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and destruction of a city are excavating in several possible places, including a middle and a lower layer of a large mound. The bottom of the middle layer contains some pieces of pottery of type 3, known to be from a later period than the time of the destruction of the city, but the lower layer does not.

The force of the evidence cited above is most seriously weakened if which of the following is true?
(A) Gerbils, small animals long native to the area, dig large burrows into which objects can fall when the burrows collapse.
(B) Pottery of types 1 and 2, found in the lower level, was used in the cities from which, according to the legend, the besieging forces came.
(C) Several pieces of stone from a lower-layer wall have been found incorporated into the remains of a building in the middle layer.
(D) Both the middle and the lower layer show evidence of large-scale destruction of habitations by fire.
(E) Bronze ax heads of a type used at the time of the siege were found in the lower level of excavation.

OA A
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:55 pm
hi neha how r u ? long time see yr post.

this is quite confusing question for me.

only A and D are the reasoning which seriously weaken the evidence if true.

in D due to fire large scale destruction may be happened but this cannot leads to finding of pottery type 3 in the bottom of middle layer like that.

only due to A there are chances to find the pottery in the bottom of middle layer due to collapse of burrows dig by gebils
Join the discussion

by kvcpk » Wed Jun 30, 2010 9:47 pm
IMO A.

Only A seems to weaken the argument.

B is strengthenig.
C has no link to conclusion.
D.both of them show evidence.. But nothing is weakieng the argumnet.
E. Strengthening.
Join the discussion