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

Redeem

here is a good one...

Expert replies
by iamtrying » Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:40 pm
Any idea which is the right one? and why?

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzler’s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years. The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719. (B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling. (C) The undated document was written before 1765. (D) The arrest record was written after the undated document. (E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Re: here is a good one...

by 800guy » Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:31 am
iamtrying wrote:Any idea which is the right one? and why?

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzler’s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years. The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719. (B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling. (C) The undated document was written before 1765. (D) The arrest record was written after the undated document. (E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.
A - this choice is not supported by the text. might be a good choice if the second statement was dated 1739
B - we can only assume that he was arrested just once for certain
C - might be true, but if the statement was written in 1764, for example, wouldn't that contradict that notion that he had been peddling for 20 years? 1764 minus 20 = 1744, which is 5 years after 1739
D - can't assume this based on the evidence.
E - this should be the right answer. it's not sexy, but it is true based on what is presented in the text.

anyone else have thoughts?
Join the discussion

by limits660 » Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:26 pm
I believe E is the correct answer.
-
Jeff Sacco
www.jeffsacco.ca
Join the discussion

by ajith » Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:49 am
E... seems to be logically correct
Join the discussion

d

by aim-wsc » Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:33 pm
are you serious guys? e?
wow! Jeff u r back :) i go with d
imtrying, would u reveal the source?
Join the discussion

by zipper123 » Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:59 am
The text can only support E.

Other choices are guesses. :shock:
==Still Working==
Join the discussion

Re: here is a good one...

by kulksnikhil » Sat Nov 11, 2006 7:28 pm
iamtrying wrote:Any idea which is the right one? and why?

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzler’s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years. The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719. (B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling. (C) The undated document was written before 1765. (D) The arrest record was written after the undated document. (E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.
I go for C

A. If 1739 May 3 was his first day then this is not true
B. If the undated statement was made in connection with the arrest made in 1739 then this cannot be the conclusion
C. Since in the undated document says '20 years' and in 1739 he WAS arrested for peddling.. even if we consider that 1739 was his first time peddling...at the most the undated document could have been written in 1759, much less than 1765
D. The arrest record might be written before also.. because there is a gap of 20 years max
E. Both are equal evidence that Schnitzler used to peddle
Join the discussion

by dineshku » Sat Nov 11, 2006 9:41 pm
I go for C
Join the discussion

STACEY HELP

by aim-wsc » Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:51 am
Since the tread starter neither reveal the source nor the answer, i would like to hear your comments here, STACEY. :)
Join the discussion

by Stacey Koprince » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:53 pm
They're all bad answers. This is not how the official GMAT will ask you to draw a conclusion; it's a bad question. Don't study it.
:)
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me
Join the discussion

by aim-wsc » Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:06 pm
I am closing the thread.
If the thread starter comes up with the source or if he wants to discuss about the problems further, he can pm me or admin;
wei ll open the thread then :)
Join the discussion

• Page 1 of 1