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.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS 2026

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

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.

GMATPREP | CR | Stalactites

Expert replies
by [email protected] » Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:59 am
Scientist: Cross-sections of stalactites - calcite formations deposited on cave ceilings by seeping water - can reveal annual variations in rainfall in particular areas over hundreds and thousands of years. We often found that when-according to these cross-sections-drought occurred in a particular area, it coincided with the collapse of an ancient society in that area. I hypothesize that drought reduced agricultural productivity in these areas, thereby leaving these societies without the resources needed to handle internal stresses and external threats.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the support for the scientist's hypothesis?

A. Many droughts indicated in the cross-sections of stalactites do not correspond with the collapse of a society in that area.

B. Information from the cross-sections of stalactites alone cannot reveal the level of agricultural output in an area at a particular time.

C. Most of the societies that collapsed during droughts did so when internal power struggles coincided with military raids from neighboring societies.

D. Most of the societies that collapsed during droughts maintained large stockpiles of food and water at the time of their collapse.

E. Information from stalactites also suggests that the collapse of some societies coincided with periods of abnormally high rainfall.

D
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by [email protected] » Fri Oct 14, 2016 10:00 am
Hi Experts,

Can you please suggest why B is incorrect?
Join the discussion

by crackverbal » Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:35 am
It is better to summarize what the scientist's hypothesis is so that weaken only that.

The scientist's hypothesis is given in the last line of the argument -

Drought --> reduces Agricultural Productivity --> No resources to handle stresses and threats --> Collapse

A - has no relationship to the hypothesis mentioned above. The hypothesis only talks about how droughts lead to societal collapse. Stalactites have nothing to do with this.
Also, notice that the argument states - "we often found ...". (this implies then that such a pattern sometimes did not occur). So, this answer option does not give any new information. Eliminate.
B - The hypothesis is about how drought leads to collapse of societies. Information from stalactites has nothing to do with this.
C - Kind of strengthens the argument. States that internal struggles and external raids during droughts indeed lead to collapse.
D - Correct answer. This breaks the causal chain shown above. We can no longer say that droughts lead to "no resources to handle internal stresses or external threats" since such societies maintained large stockpiles of food and water.
E - We are concerned only with droughts, how droughts lead to societal collapse. Other conditions, which might lead to societal collapse, are not relevant to the scientist's hypothesis.
Join Free 4 part MBA Through GMAT Video Training Series here -
https://gmat.crackverbal.com/mba-throug ... video-2018

Enroll for our GMAT Trial Course here -
https://gmatonline.crackverbal.com/

For more info on GMAT and MBA, follow us on @AskCrackVerbal
Join the discussion

by [email protected] » Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:15 am
Hi Crackverbal,

I have a question. Can I say that B is incorrect because per author, the below statement is a fact/always true.

We often found that when-according to these cross-sections-drought occurred in a particular area, it coincided with the collapse of an ancient society in that area.

Now, if such is the case then I have one more doubt:

In a weaken passage, the stimulus is under suspicion and the option statements are taken as true. My question is can I eliminate an option belonging to the weaken type where new info is allowed by saying that this is against the facts given in the passage in that case?

Also wanted to confirm when you say the stimulus is under suspicion what do you mean - you are not going to believe author's line of reasoning and authors conclusion on face value? or even the facts are doubtful?
Join the discussion

by crackverbal » Mon Oct 31, 2016 4:12 am
B is incorrect because it has nothing to do with the scientist's hypothesis -
You must only be concerned with this portion - "I hypothesize that ..."
Whether cross-sections of stalactites alone are sufficient or more information is needed is not relevant to the scientist's hypothesis
Join Free 4 part MBA Through GMAT Video Training Series here -
https://gmat.crackverbal.com/mba-throug ... video-2018

Enroll for our GMAT Trial Course here -
https://gmatonline.crackverbal.com/

For more info on GMAT and MBA, follow us on @AskCrackVerbal
Join the discussion