An oil field prospector and developer reported a large oil deposit in southwestern Texas. As a result, a large oil and gas company purchased the field with the intention of drilling oil wells in the area soon afterwards. However, the company found that what had been reported to be a large oil deposit was actually much smaller than had been indicated. Thus, the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
a. The company's methods of measuring the size of the oil deposit were determined by a third party to be more accurate than those used by the prospector.
b. The prospector did not purposefully fabricate or misrepresent the size of the oil deposit.
c. Though smaller than originally thought, the oil deposit contained enough oil to make drilling commercially feasible.
d. The prospector did not explore other oil fields and use the same methods to determine the magnitude of the oil present, if any.
e. The company had successfully drilled for oil in other large oil fields in Texas throughout the early twentieth century.
My ques. is that if ques. were "Which of the following is an assumption on which the conclusion depends?" , would u have changed your answer/approach?
As ques. asks assumption on which argument depends, should we consider only last line of paragraph [which is conclusion] to find assumption or consider whole para ?
Oil field prospector
This topic has expert replies
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 295
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:07 am
- Thanked: 4 times
- GMAT Score:690
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 10:42 am
- Thanked: 11 times
- Followed by:1 members
1. Semantics. same question. I won't change the assumption method that I use.
2. I think the whole para.(at least for me.)
IMO is B because the conclusion is based on the premise. If information is fabricated, the whole point of the argument is weakened. By eliminating possibile factor that weakens the argument, the argument does not fall apart)
A,C,D,and E are all irrelevant.
Hope it helps.
2. I think the whole para.(at least for me.)
IMO is B because the conclusion is based on the premise. If information is fabricated, the whole point of the argument is weakened. By eliminating possibile factor that weakens the argument, the argument does not fall apart)
A,C,D,and E are all irrelevant.
Hope it helps.
Disclaimer-I am not a GMAT savvy yet, but I am learning everyday with my fellow beatthegmat citizens.
I AM DETERMINED TO CRASH/NIX OUT/ATTACK BRUTALLY/CRACK VERBAL PART OF GMAT. ROAR!
I AM DETERMINED TO CRASH/NIX OUT/ATTACK BRUTALLY/CRACK VERBAL PART OF GMAT. ROAR!
- sidceg
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:22 am
- Location: Bangalore, India
- Thanked: 6 times
- Followed by:2 members
The company believes that their claim is true. Which means that the third party used by the company is believed to be more accurate than the prospector. Only then, the conclusion, which is "Thus, the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.", is possible.
But surprise! The OA is B.
Can someone explain this please?
But surprise! The OA is B.
Can someone explain this please?
- vinay1983
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 643
- Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 4:27 am
- Thanked: 48 times
- Followed by:7 members
See heresidceg wrote:The company believes that their claim is true. Which means that the third party used by the company is believed to be more accurate than the prospector. Only then, the conclusion, which is "Thus, the methods that the prospector had used to determine the size of the oil deposit must have been inaccurate.", is possible.
But surprise! The OA is B.
Can someone explain this please?
https://www.beatthegmat.com/explanation- ... cityevent=
You can, for example never foretell what any one man will do, but you can say with precision what an average number will be up to!