Not all life depends on energy from sunlight. Microbial life has been found in bedrock more than five kilometers below the surface of the Earth, and bacteria have been found on the deep ocean floor feeding on hydrogen and other gases rising from the interior of the Earth through vents in the ocean floor.
The statements above, if true, best support which of the following as a conclusion?
(A) The location in the bedrock where microbial life
was found was not near a system of volcanic vents through which hydrogen and other gases rose from the interior of the Earth.
(B) Bacteria are able to exist at the molten center of
the Earth.
(C) A thorough survey of a planet's surface is
insufficient to establish beyond a doubt that the planet contains no life.
(D) Life probably exists on Sun-orbiting comets,
which are cold agglomerations of space dust and frozen gases.
(E) Finding bacterial remains in coal and oil would
establish that the bacteria had been feeding on substances that had not been produced from the energy of sunlight.
Please give brief explainations for Answer
Life beyond
This topic has expert replies
IMO its (C).
As stated in the argument - Life has been found below the surface of earth. Hence, surveying the surface only, would not establish beyond doubt that planet contains no life.
What's the (OA)?
Thanks,
Rohit.
As stated in the argument - Life has been found below the surface of earth. Hence, surveying the surface only, would not establish beyond doubt that planet contains no life.
What's the (OA)?
Thanks,
Rohit.
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 239
- Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:50 am
I go with C.
Microbial life and bacteria are presented as example of existence of life without sunlight. E doesn't seem right, because it talks only about bacteria. So it can't be a conclusion. The statement in question provides better support to 'C' as conclusion.
Microbial life and bacteria are presented as example of existence of life without sunlight. E doesn't seem right, because it talks only about bacteria. So it can't be a conclusion. The statement in question provides better support to 'C' as conclusion.
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:41 am
- Thanked: 2 times
- Followed by:2 members
C is the correct answer.
Look at words, "five kilometers below' and ' deep ocean floor'.
They are sufficient to establish C.
E is limited in scope.
Look at words, "five kilometers below' and ' deep ocean floor'.
They are sufficient to establish C.
E is limited in scope.
Asset
- karmayogi
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 467
- Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:19 pm
- Thanked: 27 times
- Followed by:1 members
This is an OG question and if I remember correctly then the answer is C. In such questions, we can go by elimination method. A, B and D are straight out of scope. Only E can cause some confusion, but if we read it carefully, we will find it's too limited as a conclusion and doesn't consider the bacteria found on ocean floor.
Each soul is potentially divine. The goal is to manifest this divine within.
--By Swami Vivekananda
--By Swami Vivekananda