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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS 2026

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

YERI...

Expert replies
by kaulnikhil » Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:12 am
Arguing that there was no trade between Europe and
East Asia in the early Middle Ages because there are
no written records of such trade is like alluring that
the yeri, arr apelike creature supposedly existing in
the Himalayas, does not exist because there have
been no scientifically confirmed sightings. A
verifiable sighting of the yeti would prove that the
creature does exist, but the absence of sightings
cannot prove that it does not.
Which one of the following considerations, if true,
best counters the argument?
(A) Most of the evidence for the existence of trade
between Europe and East Asia in the early
Middle Ages is archaeological and therefore
does not rely on written records,
(B) Although written records of trade in East Asia
in the early Middle Ages survived, there are
almost no European documents from that
period that mention trade at all.
(C) Any trade between Europe and East Asia in the
early Middle Ages would necessarily have
been of very low volume and would have
involved high-priced items, such as precious
metals and silk.
(D) There have been no confirmed sightings of the
yeti, but there is indirect evidence, such as,
footprints, which if it is accepted as authentic
would establish the yeti's existence.
(E) There are surviving European and East Asian
written records from the early Middle Ages
that do not mention trade between the two
regions but would have been very likely to do
so if this trade had existed.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by maihuna » Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:49 am
kaulnikhil wrote:
(A) Most of the evidence for the existence of trade between Europe and East Asia in the early Middle Ages is archaeological and therefore does not rely on written records,

(D) There have been no confirmed sightings of the yeti, but there is indirect evidence, such as, footprints, which if it is accepted as authentic would establish the yeti's existence.
(E) There are surviving European and East Asian written records from the early Middle Ages that do not mention trade between the two regions but would have been very likely to do so if this trade had existed.
B and C are out as they are irrelevant. D does provide some tangential info which is again not helpful. So contenders are A and E. A says that written records are not needed because trade was archaeological, since written records are not needed the two arguments about yeti in Himalkayas and the one of European trade are not parallel, and so this counter the argument.

E is having some likely info that do not help us infer much, would have been but as well wouldn't have been. I will Choose A.
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Join the discussion

by pandeyvineet24 » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:34 am
I think it should be E.
The conclusion here is Absence of records --> does not mean no trade between Europe and Asia

A i think strengthens the argument. Absence of records --> still trade exists
E Absence of records --> because trade did not existed.

May be i am wrong. What is the OA?
Join the discussion

by hrishi19884 » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:08 pm
IMO it is A, as written records are not there, sightings are necessary to prove existence.
Hrishi

"As you sow, so shall you reap"
Join the discussion

by kaulnikhil » Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:26 am
OA E
Join the discussion