Skeletal Heat

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 8:42 am
Thanked: 4 times

Skeletal Heat

by siddhu161 » Sat Dec 28, 2013 5:45 am
On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientists uncovered skeletal remains from about 100,000 years ago. Surprisingly, all the skeletal remains, which included many species from differing biological families and spanned about two thousand years, showed evidence of experiencing temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees Fahrenheit (or 538 degrees Celsius).
Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent paradox between the cold environment and the evidence of the bones experiencing hot temperatures?

A) Other scientific research released two years before the expedition showed that the remote region of northern Canada underwent considerable warming in the past 100,000 years.
B) Chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north Canadian species produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition scientists found.
C) A little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern Canada.
D) Strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire to cook animals.
E) In the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans.

Answer is E Can anyone explain how it is.

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 » Sat Dec 28, 2013 8:18 am
siddhu161 wrote:On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientists uncovered skeletal remains from about 100,000 years ago. Surprisingly, all the skeletal remains, which included many species from differing biological families and spanned about two thousand years, showed evidence of experiencing temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees Fahrenheit (or 538 degrees Celsius).
Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent paradox between the cold environment and the evidence of the bones experiencing hot temperatures?

A) Other scientific research released two years before the expedition showed that the remote region of northern Canada underwent considerable warming in the past 100,000 years.
B) Chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north Canadian species produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition scientists found.
C) A little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern Canada.
D) Strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire to cook animals.
E) In the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans.

Answer is E Can anyone explain how it is.
I'm not a huge fan of this question. It appears to be modeled after the following Official GMAT question:
In Swartkans territory archaeologists discovered charred bone fragments dating back 1 million years. Analysis of fragments, which came from a variety of animals, showed that they had been heated to temperatures no higher than those produced in experimental campfires made from branches of white stinkwood, the most common tree around swartkans.

Which of the foll, if true, would, together with the info above, provide the best basis for the claim that the charred bone fragments are evidence of the use of fire by early hominids?

A) The white stinkwood tree is used for building material by present-day inhabitants of swartkans
B) Forest fires can heat wood to a range of temperatures that occur in campfires
C) The bone fragments were fitted together by the archaeologists to form the complete skeleton of diff, animals
D) Apart from the Swartkans discovery, there is reliable evidence that early hominids used fire as many as 500,000 years ago
E) The bone fragments were found in several distinct layers of limestone that contained primitive cutting tools known to have been used by early hominids
The big difference between the official GMAT question and the "skeletal heat" question is that the official question is a Strengthen the Argument question, while the "skeletal heat" question is a Paradox question.

In Strengthen the Argument questions, we're looking for an answer choice that strengthens (however slightly) the relationship between the premises and the conclusion.

In Paradox questions, we're looking for an answer choice that provides an "aha moment" that clearly explains the apparent discrepancy between the premises and the conclusion.

In the Official GMAT question, the correct answer is E, because we're looking for an answer choice that ties the charred bone fragments to the use of fire by early hominids. Does E GUARANTEE that the charred bone fragments are evidence of the use of fire by early hominids? No, but we aren't looking for absolute certainty in Strengthen the Argument questions; we're merely looking for something that helps the argument.


In the "skeletal heat" question, we're trying to explain how the fish bones could have been heated.
In my opinion, answer choices C and E both have issues.
For answer choice C to be correct, we must assume that a forest fire could have lasted for 2000 years, and we must assume that the fish were already lying around (out of the water) when the forest fire hit.
For answer choice E to be correct, we must assume that these humans possessed fire-making skills.

Perhaps, since E requires fewer assumptions, it is correct. Having said that, I don't feel that this answer choice necessarily provides the "aha" moment associated with most Paradox questions.

Cheers,
Brent

By the way, if anyone is interested, we have a free video on Paradox questions: https://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat- ... ng?id=1143
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
Image

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3225
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:40 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 1710 times
Followed by:614 members
GMAT Score:800

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Sat Dec 28, 2013 8:22 am
siddhu161 wrote:On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientists uncovered skeletal remains from about 100,000 years ago. Surprisingly, all the skeletal remains, which included many species from differing biological families and spanned about two thousand years, showed evidence of experiencing temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees Fahrenheit (or 538 degrees Celsius).
Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent paradox between the cold environment and the evidence of the bones experiencing hot temperatures?

A) Other scientific research released two years before the expedition showed that the remote region of northern Canada underwent considerable warming in the past 100,000 years.
B) Chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north Canadian species produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition scientists found.
C) A little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern Canada.
D) Strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire to cook animals.
E) In the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans.

Answer is E Can anyone explain how it is.
Hi Siddhu,

please always post your sources. A quick search of the Oracle (i.e. Google) revealed that this a question from Platinum GMAT, of whom I've never before heard.

This is a horrible question. None of the answers explain the paradox and, while a couple are classic traps, there is no correct answer. (E) requires massive assumptions in order to be relevant and the GMAT will never require you to look beyond the page to justify the correct answer.

Stuart
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 8:42 am
Thanked: 4 times

by siddhu161 » Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:30 pm
Hi Sturat,

You are right. This is the question from Platinum Prep, which i too came across while googling CR questions. That's why I posted here to get it clarified as I did not get/guess any answer out of given choices.

Currently I mainly practising CR n RC questions. Can you refer me any more sources for the same? I am referring OG13 and CR section in this forum, and google of course..

Thanks,
Sid

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3225
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:40 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 1710 times
Followed by:614 members
GMAT Score:800

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:43 pm
Hi Sid,

you'll find some decent free resources on the net, you just have to be really careful. I'd always look for reviews of the source before diving in and using its questions. For all you know, those free questions were written by some bored guy living in his mom's basement!

Depending on how much you want to invest in your GMAT studies, there are ample reliable resources available as well. If you're close to your target score, then self-study from an acclaimed book can be very effective. If you're not so close, then a course (either self-study or teacher-led) is a great investment toward your MBA.

Not surprisingly, I'm going to recommend Kaplan resources and courses. Our most affordable comprehensive course is the self-study On Demand option (it has all the same resources as our teacher-led courses, except that you watch pre-recorded versions of all of the classes instead of live ones). Our Anywhere classes (teacher-led live and online) get great feedback from students.

I don't want this to turn into a giant Kaplan commercial (although I can say great stuff about Kaplan for hours!, so if you have any questions you'd rather ask in private send me a PM!

Stuart
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 8:42 am
Thanked: 4 times

by siddhu161 » Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:16 pm
Hi Stuart,

Thanks a lot for your suggestions.

I tried sending you PM but message is stuck up in my Outbox past 2 days so posting here itself.

I have started preparing for GMAT in October 2013. But had to take a break due to illness for almost 3 weeks in November. I started again then.
I am keeping target score as 700. Current preparation material includes :
OG13, GMATPrep s/w and Manhatten SC guide.
I am scoring approx 46-49 scaled score in quant but lagging much in verbal with scaled score varying from 32-35.
I have also ordered Kaplan verbal workbook (7th edition).(will receive it within 2-3 days).

Could you please help me with how to proceed in preparation. I am working professional so daily get around 3 hrs and full weekend(sat-sun) to prepare.
I am targeting January 3rd or 4th week for GMAT.

Thanks and Regards,
Sid