Source - 800score.com prep test
One of Hoyle's arguments can be summarized as follows: on Earth, all the natural occurrences of methane that we know of are associated with 'methanogens' (methane-producing bacteria). In addition, there is evidence that methane is also present in some inter-planetary material in comets. Therefore, it is likely that methanogens are present in these materials as well.
Which of the following is true of this argument?
A. It would be strengthened by the discovery of other compounds which occur both on earth and in comets, and whose terrestrial occurrence is strongly correlated with bacterial action.
B. Since this argument does not appeal to analogies between terrestrial and extra-terrestrial phenomena, it does not need any explanation of how methanogens synthesize methane.
C. This argument has no evidential force with respect to the extra-terrestrial existence of bacteria unless it can be supplemented with an explanation of the process by which terrestrial bacteria synthesize methane.
D. The plausibility of Hoyle's conclusion would be seriously weakened if the existence of methanogenic bacteria were revealed to exist on other planets in our solar system through on-site explorations.
E. It would be strengthened if it were discovered that methane is generated in Antarctica without bacterial action at low temperatures, which approximate those of comets far out in the solar system.
[spoiler]OA: A[/spoiler]
I am rather quiet confused with answer choice A.
My process says that A can't be the answer choice as it compares the other compound and it's related bacterial action ,to that methane and methanogens
Even if there exist a similarity between a compound and it's bacterial action to methane and methanogens,we can't conclude that methanogens are likely to be present in inter-planetary material.
Can anyone explain me on what bases the answer choice A is correct?
Target Test Prep is 20% off right now!
Use code FLASH20
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
CR: Strengthen question
This topic has expert replies
-
gauravgundal
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:15 am
- Location: India
- Thanked: 13 times
Last edited by gauravgundal on Wed May 18, 2011 6:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
see highlighted part:
that's not what this is; this is a strengthen / weaken question. on this type of question, a "strengthener" doesn't have to be something that proves the conclusion beyond any doubt; it just has to be something that serves as strong corroborating evidence.
i.e., let's say that someone robs a bank and drives away in an orange toyota with 100 brown sacks of money.
now, let's say you have "(A) Joe, who has an orange toyota, was seen dropping off 100 empty brown sacks at the garbage dump a few hours after the robbery".
does this evidence prove that joe committed the crime? no.
does it strengthen the argument that joe committed the crime? heck yes.
you're thinking of the wrong type of question; you're thinking of this as though it were a "draw the conclusion" question, in which you essentially have to prove things.gauravgundal wrote:I am rather quiet confused with answer choice A.
My process says that A can't be the answer choice as it compares the other compound and it's related bacterial action ,to that methane and methanogens
Even if there exist a similarity between a compound and it's bacterial action to methane and methanogens,we can't conclude that methanogens are likely to be present in inter-planetary material.
Can anyone explain me on what bases the answer choice A is correct?
that's not what this is; this is a strengthen / weaken question. on this type of question, a "strengthener" doesn't have to be something that proves the conclusion beyond any doubt; it just has to be something that serves as strong corroborating evidence.
i.e., let's say that someone robs a bank and drives away in an orange toyota with 100 brown sacks of money.
now, let's say you have "(A) Joe, who has an orange toyota, was seen dropping off 100 empty brown sacks at the garbage dump a few hours after the robbery".
does this evidence prove that joe committed the crime? no.
does it strengthen the argument that joe committed the crime? heck yes.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
mundasingh123
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2330
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
- Thanked: 56 times
- Followed by:26 members
I feel the question has not been phrased well .The question stem should state that you are supposed to look for a strengthen / weaken answer
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
in this case those signals are in the answer choices. this format is a bit unusual -- i.e., i'm not sure whether it has an official precedent -- but the complaint that it's inadequately phrased is not valid.mundasingh123 wrote:I feel the question has not been phrased well .The question stem should state that you are supposed to look for a strengthen / weaken answer
note the following wording at the outset of choice (a):
It would be strengthened by ...
that's a very explicit indicator that you are considering the argument in terms of strengthening and weakening, with all of the usual attendant concerns about how to process the answer choices.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
gauravgundal
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:15 am
- Location: India
- Thanked: 13 times
Ron thanks for helping me out to understand the question type, but here I am still confused how A can be the answer and why not E can be the correct answer.
Is E the incorrect answer because it tells us about the condition in which bacterial action should /should not happen?
I rejected answer choice A because it talks about the other compound occurrence that I can't co-relate it with methane.
Is E the incorrect answer because it tells us about the condition in which bacterial action should /should not happen?
I rejected answer choice A because it talks about the other compound occurrence that I can't co-relate it with methane.
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
(e) is incorrect because it weakens the argument!gauravgundal wrote:Ron thanks for helping me out to understand the question type, but here I am still confused how A can be the answer and why not E can be the correct answer.
Is E the incorrect answer because it tells us about the condition in which bacterial action should /should not happen?
(e) draws a parallel between
* the possible process going on in the comets
and
* a process on earth that *doesn't* involve bacteria.
since the whole point of the argument is to argue that bacteria *are* involved in the comets, this is not good for the argument.
you're thinking too linearly/logically, and not making reasonable inferences.I rejected answer choice A because it talks about the other compound occurrence that I can't co-relate it with methane.
basically, choice (a) is saying "there are important similarities between the situation on the comets and another situation in which bacteria *are* involved".
it doesn't matter too much what those similarities are -- it matters that they are similarities, and that they contribute to the notion that bacteria are involved.
--
analogy:
let's say that i want to prove that person X robbed a bank.
if one discovers that person X has a relatively rare ink on his hands, and that the same ink is used in the bank that was robbed, then that strengthens the argument -- even though ink itself is not directly correlated to bank robberies in any way.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
Ron -
Can you please help me with answer choice C? I am unable to follow the point it is trying to make.
Also, below is my analysis of answer choice A - According to the stimulus, methane is found on earth and is associated with bacteria (methogens). Methane is found on a comet. Conclusion is that the bacteria is likely present on the comet.
In answer choice A - let's say we find Zinc on earth and on a comet. Zinc on earth (terrestrial) is associated with bacteria. With this information, how can we say answer choice A strengthens the argument that comet is likely to have bacteria (methogens) associated with methane? If it is said that - Zinc on a comet is associated with bacteria, then the answer choice A will strengthen the conclusion right? I know I am missing something as this is the correct answer. Can you please correct my thought process?
Thanks
Can you please help me with answer choice C? I am unable to follow the point it is trying to make.
Also, below is my analysis of answer choice A - According to the stimulus, methane is found on earth and is associated with bacteria (methogens). Methane is found on a comet. Conclusion is that the bacteria is likely present on the comet.
In answer choice A - let's say we find Zinc on earth and on a comet. Zinc on earth (terrestrial) is associated with bacteria. With this information, how can we say answer choice A strengthens the argument that comet is likely to have bacteria (methogens) associated with methane? If it is said that - Zinc on a comet is associated with bacteria, then the answer choice A will strengthen the conclusion right? I know I am missing something as this is the correct answer. Can you please correct my thought process?
Thanks
lunarpower wrote:(e) is incorrect because it weakens the argument!gauravgundal wrote:Ron thanks for helping me out to understand the question type, but here I am still confused how A can be the answer and why not E can be the correct answer.
Is E the incorrect answer because it tells us about the condition in which bacterial action should /should not happen?
(e) draws a parallel between
* the possible process going on in the comets
and
* a process on earth that *doesn't* involve bacteria.
since the whole point of the argument is to argue that bacteria *are* involved in the comets, this is not good for the argument.
you're thinking too linearly/logically, and not making reasonable inferences.I rejected answer choice A because it talks about the other compound occurrence that I can't co-relate it with methane.
basically, choice (a) is saying "there are important similarities between the situation on the comets and another situation in which bacteria *are* involved".
it doesn't matter too much what those similarities are -- it matters that they are similarities, and that they contribute to the notion that bacteria are involved.
--
analogy:
let's say that i want to prove that person X robbed a bank.
if one discovers that person X has a relatively rare ink on his hands, and that the same ink is used in the bank that was robbed, then that strengthens the argument -- even though ink itself is not directly correlated to bank robberies in any way.
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
choice (c) says that you would have to know *how* bacteria make methane in order to validate the argument. this is not true -- it doesn't matter *how* the bacteria make the methane; all that matters is the fact that they do.gmat1978 wrote:Ron -
Can you please help me with answer choice C? I am unable to follow the point it is trying to make.
read the post above yours, starting with "you're thinking too linearly/logically, and not making reasonable inferences." any other explanation i could give would just be another version of that one.Also, below is my analysis of answer choice A - According to the stimulus, methane is found on earth and is associated with bacteria (methogens). Methane is found on a comet. Conclusion is that the bacteria is likely present on the comet.
In answer choice A - let's say we find Zinc on earth and on a comet. Zinc on earth (terrestrial) is associated with bacteria. With this information, how can we say answer choice A strengthens the argument that comet is likely to have bacteria (methogens) associated with methane? If it is said that - Zinc on a comet is associated with bacteria, then the answer choice A will strengthen the conclusion right? I know I am missing something as this is the correct answer. Can you please correct my thought process?
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
