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

Redeem

OG CR:Birds have been said to be descended

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 366
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2015 3:35 am
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:2 members

OG CR:Birds have been said to be descended

by NandishSS » Sat Sep 17, 2016 8:54 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Birds have been said to be descended from certain birdlike dinosaur species with which they share distinctive structural features. The fossil record, however, shows that this cannot be so, since there are bird fossils much older than the earliest birdlike dinosaur fossils that have been found.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

A) The birdlike dinosaurs have no descendants.
B) There are no flightless dinosaur species that have the distinctive structural features shred by birds and birdlike dinosaurs.
C) There are no birdlike dinosaur fossils that are older that the bird fossils but have nit yet been unearthed.
D) It could not have been the case that some birds were descendant from one of the bird like dinosaur species and other birds from another.
E) Birds cannot have been descended from dinosaur species with which the birds do not share the distinctive structural features.


OA:C

Source:OG 2017
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2095
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pm
Thanked: 1443 times
Followed by:247 members

by ceilidh.erickson » Sun Sep 25, 2016 7:16 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

When we're approaching an ASSUMPTION question, we're looking for the logical gap between the premises and conclusion - the thing that MUST be true for the argument to hold.

Premise: there are bird fossils much older than the earliest birdlike dinosaur fossils that have been found.

Conclusion: It cannot be true that birds are descended from these birdlike dinosaur species.

What would indicate a flaw in this logic? Sometimes when looking for an assumption, it helps to think about "what ifs" that would make the conclusion untrue:
- what if some of these birdlike dinosaurs evolved into birds, but others stayed as they were?
- what if an animal species and the type of species they branched off from could be alive at the same time?
- what if the fossil record is incomplete, and doesn't give us enough puzzle pieces to make inferences about chronology?

Assumptions: Here's what's necessary for this premise to support this conclusion:
- we have a fossil record comprehensive enough to give us a complete evolutionary picture
- evolution is linear, not branching. Descendent species cannot be contemporaneous with ancestor species.

As you're going through answer choices, ask yourself - does this HAVE to be true for the conclusion to hold?

A) The birdlike dinosaurs have no descendants.
This does not have to be true for the argument to hold. The birdlike dinosaurs could have had descendants, but just not these bird descendants.

B) There are no flightless dinosaur species that have the distinctive structural features shared by birds and birdlike dinosaurs.
Irrelevant. There is no direct connection between flightless dinosaurs and birdlike dinosaurs or birds.

C) There are no birdlike dinosaur fossils that are older that the bird fossils but have nit yet been unearthed.
Yes, this MUST be true for the argument to hold. If the reverse were true - there ARE older birdlike dinosaurs, but we haven't found them yet - then the logic of this argument would fall apart. The fossils we currently have wouldn't reflect the true chronology. Correct.

D) It could not have been the case that some birds were descendant from one of the bird like dinosaur species and other birds from another.
The idea of evolutionary branching is germane to the argument, but because the conclusion itself talks about "the earliest birdlike dinosaur fossils," we can assume that all such species are included in this group. Distinctions within the group wouldn't matter to the argument.

E) Birds cannot have been descended from dinosaur species with which the birds do not share the distinctive structural features.
This doesn't have to be true. Birds could be very distant descendants of dinosaurs that had very different features. We're specifically looking at the connection to BIRDLIKE dinosaurs, and whether the chronology we see indicates a line of descent. This is irrelevant.

The correct answer is C.
Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 11:59 pm
Thanked: 20 times

by MBA Challengers » Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:14 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

NandishSS wrote:Birds have been said to be descended from certain birdlike dinosaur species with which they share distinctive structural features. The fossil record, however, shows that this cannot be so, since there are bird fossils much older than the earliest birdlike dinosaur fossils that have been found.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

A) The birdlike dinosaurs have no descendants.
B) There are no flightless dinosaur species that have the distinctive structural features shred by birds and birdlike dinosaurs.
C) There are no birdlike dinosaur fossils that are older that the bird fossils but have nit yet been unearthed.
D) It could not have been the case that some birds were descendant from one of the bird like dinosaur species and other birds from another.
E) Birds cannot have been descended from dinosaur species with which the birds do not share the distinctive structural features.


OA:C

Source:OG 2017
Let's quickly list down the premise and the conclusion here:

Premises
1. Birds are said to have descended from bird-like dinosaur species with shared distinctive structural features
2. Bird fossils much older than earliest bird-like dinosaurs discovered

Conclusion:
Birds could not have evolved from bird-like dinosaurs

Let's now look at the options and try negating each of them:
A. This added premise makes no difference to the conclusion one way or the other. They could have had descendants without this structural similarity or maybe not. This does not add any information. Incorrect.
B. There is no relative or comparative timeline given for any other dinosaur specie. So, whether they share those characteristic or not, no idea to know if they ore-date this bird-like species or come later. Incorrect.
C. This is an interesting option. Archeology is an ever evolving field with newer findings often leading to date shifting for artefacts. What if there are fossil remains of this bird-like species which hasn't been unearthed yet. Clearly, the author is assuming all fossil discoveries related to species have already been made. Correct
D. The premise talks about the generic category of birds and specifically structural similarities with a bird-like dinosaur specie. This option contradicts the premise. Incorrect.
E. The premise talks about birds having evolved from bird-like dinosaur species. Thus, the author has already evaluated the possibility and it is a part of he premise. Incorrect

Thus, he correct answer is C.
Log on to www.mbachallengers.com for
Easy strategic GMAT prep
For any queries mail us at [email protected]
Follow MBA Challengers on Facebook
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:41 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

NandishSS wrote:Birds have been said to be descended from certain birdlike dinosaur species with which they share distinctive structural features. The fossil record, however, shows that this cannot be so, since there are bird fossils much older than the earliest birdlike dinosaur fossils that have been found.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

A) The birdlike dinosaurs have no descendants.
B) There are no flightless dinosaur species that have the distinctive structural features shred by birds and birdlike dinosaurs.
C) There are no birdlike dinosaur fossils that are older that the bird fossils but have nit yet been unearthed.
D) It could not have been the case that some birds were descendant from one of the bird like dinosaur species and other birds from another.
E) Birds cannot have been descended from dinosaur species with which the birds do not share the distinctive structural features.
Premise: There are bird fossils much older than the earliest birdlike dinosaur fossils that have been found.
Conclusion: Birds could not have descended from certain birdlike dinosaur species.

Apply the NEGATION TEST.
When the correct answer choice is negated, the conclusion will be invalidated.

C, negated:
Birdlike dinosaur fossils that are older than the bird fossils have not yet been unearthed.
Here, there are birdlike dinosaur fossils buried in the Earth that are OLDER than the bird fossils, invalidating the conclusion that birds could not have descended from certain birdlike dinosaur species.
Since the negation of C invalidates the conclusion, C is the correct assumption: a statement that MUST BE TRUE for the conclusion to be valid.

The correct answer is 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
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 16207
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC
Thanked: 5254 times
Followed by:1268 members
GMAT Score:770

by Brent@GMATPrepNow » Tue Mar 06, 2018 9:18 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

NandishSS wrote:Birds have been said to be descended from certain birdlike dinosaur species with which they share distinctive structural features. The fossil record, however, shows that this cannot be so, since there are bird fossils much older than the earliest birdlike dinosaur fossils that have been found.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

A) The birdlike dinosaurs have no descendants.
B) There are no flightless dinosaur species that have the distinctive structural features shred by birds and birdlike dinosaurs.
C) There are no birdlike dinosaur fossils that are older that the bird fossils but have nit yet been unearthed.
D) It could not have been the case that some birds were descendant from one of the bird like dinosaur species and other birds from another.
E) Birds cannot have been descended from dinosaur species with which the birds do not share the distinctive structural features.
This is an assumption question.

PREMISE: Some believe that birds descended from dinosaurs
PREMISE: There are bird fossils much older than the earliest birdlike dinosaur fossils found.
CONCLUSION: Birds did NOT descend from birdlike dinosaurs

First try to identify an assumption that the author needs in order for the conclusion be valid.
If you can't think of one, you may need to resort to the negation method
So, we'll negate each answer choice.
The answer choice that, when negated, DESTROYS the argument will be the correct answer.

A) The birdlike dinosaurs do have descendants.
Does this destroy the conclusion that Birds did NOT descend from birdlike dinosaur?
No. It makes no difference where the birdlike dinosaurs came from.
ELIMINATE A

B) There ARE flightless dinosaur species that have the distinctive structural features shared by birds and birdlike dinosaurs.
Does this destroy the conclusion that Birds did NOT descend from birdlike dinosaur?
No, the argument is about whether birds have DESCENDED from birdlike dinosaurs.
ELIMINATE B

C) There ARE birdlike dinosaur fossils that are older than the bird fossils but have not yet been unearthed.
Does this destroy the conclusion that Birds did NOT descend from birdlike dinosaur?
YES! The author's argument is based on the fact that there are no discovered birdlike dinosaur fossils that are older than bird fossils.
So, if there ARE birdlike dinosaur fossils that are older than the bird fossils, then this KILLS the author's conclusion.
KEEP C

D) It COULD have been the case that some birds were descendant from one of the bird like dinosaur species and other birds from another.
Does this destroy the conclusion that Birds did NOT descend from birdlike dinosaur?
No. The word COULD doesn't have the certainty required to destroy an argument.
ELIMINATE D

E) Birds MAY have descended from dinosaur species with which the birds do not share the distinctive structural features.
Does this destroy the conclusion that Birds did NOT descend from birdlike dinosaur?
No. The conclusion is all about birds descending from birdlike dinosaurs
ELIMINATE E

Answer: C

Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1