Although fullerenes - spherical molecules made entirely of carbon - were first found in the laboratory, they have since been found in nature, formed in fissures of the rare mineral shungie. Since laboratory synthesis of fullerenes requires distinctive conditions of temperature and pressure, this discovery should give geologists a test case for evaluating hypotheses about the state of the earth's crust at the time these naturally occurring fullerenes were formed.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument?
a. confirming that the shungie genuinely contained fullerenes took careful experimentation
b. some fullerenes have also been found on the remains of a small meteorite that collided with a spacecraft
c. the mineral shungite itself contains large amounts of carbon, from which the fullerenes apparently formed
d. the naturally occurring fullerenes are arranged in a previously unknown crystalline structure.
e. shungite itself is formed only under distinctive conditions.
C and E seem to strengthen the argument. A and B seem to have no relevance. and So i chose D, which turns out to be right, but i have no idea what it means. Can someone tell me why it is correct?
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument?
a. confirming that the shungie genuinely contained fullerenes took careful experimentation
b. some fullerenes have also been found on the remains of a small meteorite that collided with a spacecraft
c. the mineral shungite itself contains large amounts of carbon, from which the fullerenes apparently formed
d. the naturally occurring fullerenes are arranged in a previously unknown crystalline structure.
e. shungite itself is formed only under distinctive conditions.
C and E seem to strengthen the argument. A and B seem to have no relevance. and So i chose D, which turns out to be right, but i have no idea what it means. Can someone tell me why it is correct?
