Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its

This topic has expert replies
Moderator
Posts: 7187
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:43 pm
Followed by:23 members

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.

In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.

(B) The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

(C) The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.

(D) The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that conclusion.

(E) The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion

OA E

Source: GMAT Prep

Legendary Member
Posts: 2214
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:22 pm
Followed by:5 members

by deloitte247 » Sun Jun 09, 2019 8:32 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Option A - Incorrect
The first boldface does not serve as a presented circumstance to which the astronomer explains. Also, for the second boldface, it's not an explanation but a conclusion to the argument.

Option B - Incorrect
This is incorrect because the first boldface isn't a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument, but in turn, support it.

Option C - Incorrect
Here, the second boldface is the conclusion to the argument, so it cannot serve as evidence to support the argument.

Option D - Incorrect
The first boldface supports the conclusion, but the second is the conclusion. So, it cannot acknowledge a consideration that weighs against the conclusion.

Option E - Correct
The first boldface depicts a judgement that supports the conclusion, being arrived upon in the argument, while the second boldface is the conclusion to the argument