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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

CR 3

Expert replies
by aditya8062 » Sun Sep 28, 2014 1:03 pm
According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, the wave of species extinctions that occurred Line in North America about 11,000 years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene era, can be directly attributed to the arrival of humans, i.e., the Paleoindians, who were ancestors of modern Native Americans. However, anthropologist Shepard Krech points out that large animal species vanished even in areas where there is no evidence to demon-strate that Paleoindians hunted them.Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption. Krech also contradicts Martin's exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene. Still, Krech attributes secondary if not primary responsibility for the extinctions to the Paleoindians, arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Krech's objections to Martin's theory?

A. Further studies showing that the climatic change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe and widespread than was previously believed
B. New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct
C. Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras

D. Researchers' discoveries that many more species became extinct in North America at the end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed
E. New discoveries establishing that both the arrival of humans in North America and the wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago

my concern: Kresch is making two objections to Martin's theory. one is regarding the "Paleoindians" factor in making "species" extinct AND the other objection is of Martin's rejection regarding "climatic change" theory. how do we realize that "which objection" is question asking?

ALSO the premise states that: Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption.---->implying that "some" small animals/ plants had disappeared through "human consumption" !! so what extra information is B adding as an answer?

ALSO how do we eliminate C?
Join the discussion
Source: — Reading Comprehension |

by aiming800 » Sat Aug 15, 2015 1:47 am
I also have the same doubt regarding this question. Can experts clarify?
Join the discussion

by GMATGuruNY » Sat Aug 15, 2015 2:43 am
aditya8062 wrote:According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, the wave of species extinctions that occurred in North America about 11,000 years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene era, can be directly attributed to the arrival of humans, i.e., the Paleoindians, who were ancestors of modern Native Americans. However, anthropologist Shepard Krech points out that large animal species vanished even in areas where there is no evidence to demon-strate that Paleoindians hunted them.Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption. Krech also contradicts Martin's exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene. Still, Krech attributes secondary if not primary responsibility for the extinctions to the Paleoindians, arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Krech's objections to Martin's theory?

A. Further studies showing that the climatic change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe and widespread than was previously believed
B. New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct
C. Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras

D. Researchers' discoveries that many more species became extinct in North America at the end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed
E. New discoveries establishing that both the arrival of humans in North America and the wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago
Note:
The passage above is not CR but RC.

Martin's conclusion:
The wave of species extinctions can be directly attributed to the Paleoindians.
Krech's conclusion:
Because the extinctions were not confined to large animals -- because small animals, plants, and insects also disappeared -- the wave of species extinctions CANNOT be attributed to the Paleoindians.

Krech assumes that the Paleoindians did not use the small animals, plants and insects that disappeared at the end of the Pleistocene period.
B: The Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct.
This answer choice attacks Krech's assumption, WEAKENING his conclusion that the wave of extinctions cannot be attributed to the Paleoindians.

The correct answer is B.
ALSO how do we eliminate C?
From the passage:
By asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene, Krech contradicts Martin's exclusion of climatic change as an explanation.
In other words, Krech attributes the wave of extinctions to CLIMATE CHANGE.
C: Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras.
This answer choice STRENGTHENS Krech's contention that the wave of extinctions can be attributed to climate change.
Eliminate C.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Join the discussion

by aiming800 » Sun Aug 23, 2015 5:32 am
GMATGuruNY wrote:
aditya8062 wrote:According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, the wave of species extinctions that occurred in North America about 11,000 years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene era, can be directly attributed to the arrival of humans, i.e., the Paleoindians, who were ancestors of modern Native Americans. However, anthropologist Shepard Krech points out that large animal species vanished even in areas where there is no evidence to demon-strate that Paleoindians hunted them.Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption. Krech also contradicts Martin's exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene. Still, Krech attributes secondary if not primary responsibility for the extinctions to the Paleoindians, arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Krech's objections to Martin's theory?

A. Further studies showing that the climatic change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe and widespread than was previously believed
B. New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct
C. Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras

D. Researchers' discoveries that many more species became extinct in North America at the end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed
E. New discoveries establishing that both the arrival of humans in North America and the wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago
Note:
The passage above is not CR but RC.

Martin's conclusion:
The wave of species extinctions can be directly attributed to the Paleoindians.
Krech's conclusion:
Because the extinctions were not confined to large animals -- because small animals, plants, and insects also disappeared -- the wave of species extinctions CANNOT be attributed to the Paleoindians.

Krech assumes that the Paleoindians did not use the small animals, plants and insects that disappeared at the end of the Pleistocene period.
B: The Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct.
This answer choice attacks Krech's assumption, WEAKENING his conclusion that the wave of extinctions cannot be attributed to the Paleoindians.

The correct answer is B.
ALSO how do we eliminate C?
From the passage:
By asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene, Krech contradicts Martin's exclusion of climatic change as an explanation.
In other words, Krech attributes the wave of extinctions to CLIMATE CHANGE.
C: Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras.
This answer choice STRENGTHENS Krech's contention that the wave of extinctions can be attributed to climate change.
Eliminate C.

Hi GmatGuru,

My doubt here is about the bold part,highlighted in red

small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption.

When Krech mentions the phrase highlighted in red above doesn't he already assumes that some of the consumption of those small animals,plants and insects are because of the humans,may be not to an extent that humans are the reason for their extinction,but to some extent. If yes, then isn't B strengthening what Krech already assumes,which is that some of the consumption of those small animals,plants and insects are because of the humans.

Could you please clarify.

Regards,
aiming 800
Join the discussion

by GMATGuruNY » Mon Aug 24, 2015 2:09 pm
aiming800 wrote:Hi GmatGuru,

My doubt here is about the bold part,highlighted in red

small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption.

When Krech mentions the phrase highlighted in red above doesn't he already assumes that some of the consumption of those small animals,plants and insects are because of the humans,may be not to an extent that humans are the reason for their extinction,but to some extent. If yes, then isn't B strengthening what Krech already assumes,which is that some of the consumption of those small animals,plants and insects are because of the humans.

Could you please clarify.

Regards,
aiming 800
OA: New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians MADE USE of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct.
The OA does NOT state that the Paleoindians CONSUMED the extinct species.
Rather, it states that the Paleoindians MADE USE of these species.
This information WEAKENS Krech's conclusion that the extinctions cannot be attributed to the arrival of humans.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Join the discussion

by aiming800 » Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:27 am
GMATGuruNY wrote:
aiming800 wrote:Hi GmatGuru,

My doubt here is about the bold part,highlighted in red

small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption.

When Krech mentions the phrase highlighted in red above doesn't he already assumes that some of the consumption of those small animals,plants and insects are because of the humans,may be not to an extent that humans are the reason for their extinction,but to some extent. If yes, then isn't B strengthening what Krech already assumes,which is that some of the consumption of those small animals,plants and insects are because of the humans.

Could you please clarify.

Regards,
aiming 800
OA: New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians MADE USE of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct.
The OA does NOT state that the Paleoindians CONSUMED the extinct species.
Rather, it states that the Paleoindians MADE USE of these species.
This information WEAKENS Krech's conclusion that the extinctions cannot be attributed to the arrival of humans.
Thanks GmatGuru for you explanation.

What i can understand from your explanation is that "consumption" is subtly different from "Made Use".

If i am not wrong, "made use" hints towards a much larger usage than consumption, such as usage for livelihood, or for business etc. The usage at such a large scale will again hint that this usage could have been the reason for the extinction of small extinct species because usage was at such a large scale.

According to me that is how "consumption" and "made use" are subtly different. But i am not sure whether my line of thinking is correct. It will be really helpful if you can confirm the same or correct it if it is wrong.

Regards,
aiming800
Join the discussion