According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 24 Jan 2017, 16:47

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin,

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Posts: 250
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 311 [0], given: 29

According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2009, 03:32
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

80% (03:20) correct 20% (02:05) wrong based on 143 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, the wave of species extinctions that occurred Line in North America about 11,000 years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene era, can be directly attributed to the arrival of humans, i.e., the Paleoindians, who were ancestors of modern Native Americans. However, anthropologist Shepard Krech points out that large animal species vanished even in areas where there is no evidence to demon-strate that Paleoindians hunted them.Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption. Krech also contradicts Martin’s exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene. Still, Krech attributes secondary if not primary responsibility for the extinctions to the Paleoindians, arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Krech’s objections to Martin’s theory?

A. Further studies showing that the climatic change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe and widespread than was previously believed
B. New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct
C. Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras
D. Researchers’ discoveries that many more species became extinct in North America at the end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed
E. New discoveries establishing that both the arrival of humans in North America and the wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago

Please explain in a detailed way.Nice explanation will be appreciated with kudos ) . OA after explanations.
_________________

Please give kudos if you enjoy the explanations that I have given. Thanks

If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Current Student
Status: What's your raashee?
Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Posts: 1847
Location: United States (NC)
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
Schools: UNC (Kenan-Flagler) - Class of 2013
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
WE: Programming (Computer Software)
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 249 [0], given: 52

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2009, 04:56
perfectstranger wrote:
According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, the wave of species extinctions that occurred Line in North America about 11,000 years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene era, can be directly attributed to the arrival of humans, i.e., the Paleoindians, who were ancestors of modern Native Americans. However, anthropologist Shepard Krech points out that large animal species vanished even in areas where there is no evidence to demon-strate that Paleoindians hunted them.Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption. Krech also contradicts Martin’s exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene. Still, Krech attributes secondary if not primary responsibility for the extinctions to the Paleoindians, arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Krech’s objections to Martin’s theory?

A. Further studies showing that the climatic change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe and widespread than was previously believed
B. New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct
C. Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras
D. Researchers’ discoveries that many more species became extinct in North America at the end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed
E. New discoveries establishing that both the arrival of humans in North America and the wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago

Please explain in a detailed way.Nice explanation will be appreciated with kudos ) . OA after explanations.

B
A. this will strengthen Krech's theory since he said climate change would affect the animals etc.
B. This seem to be good. Krech argued not only big animals but plants, insects etc. were also extinct - noting humans prob didnt cause them. But B shows that humans were using them so it weakens the argument they weren't harming those things.
C. Similar to A. It would only strengthen Krech
D. Irrelevant to the question.
E. It doesnt matter - they are not arguing about time
_________________

If you like my answers please +1 kudos!

Manager
Joined: 19 Jun 2009
Posts: 141
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 650 Q51 V27
GMAT 2: 710 Q48 V39
GPA: 3.2
WE: Engineering (Computer Hardware)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 21

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2009, 05:19
Martin's theory : Extinction was due to arrival of human at the end of Pleistocene era.

Krech's theory : Large animals vanished elsewhere too.
And, not only large animals did extinct.
Climate change also occurred at the same time.
Human interface was secondary.

We have to weaken Krech's opposition to Martin's theory.

Krech contradicts Martin's theory by saying that climate change occurred at the end of Pleistocene era.

It is explicitly mentioned in the passage in line - 'Krech also contradicts Martin’s exclusion.....'.

Choice 'C' says climate changes have occurred even in previous and subsequent Pleistocene eras. So clearly, this is not the reason for extinction.

All of the , B, D & E support one way or the other to Krech's theory.

Am I correct ?
_________________

I am ready to fall, but not before I fly.

Manager
Joined: 19 Jun 2009
Posts: 141
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 650 Q51 V27
GMAT 2: 710 Q48 V39
GPA: 3.2
WE: Engineering (Computer Hardware)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 21

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2009, 05:19
[quote=shaselai]B. This seem to be good. Krech argued not only big animals but plants, insects etc. were also extinct - noting humans prob didnt cause them. But B shows that humans were using them so it weakens the argument they weren't harming those things.[/quote]

Passage explicitly says - Krech attributes secondary responsibility to humans. 'B' supports Krech in that small animals & plants also extincted.
_________________

I am ready to fall, but not before I fly.

Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 357
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 32

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2009, 19:30
B.

OA pls.
Director
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 897
Name: Ronak Amin
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Followers: 28

Kudos [?]: 648 [0], given: 18

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2009, 21:59
alpeshvc wrote:
[quote=shaselai]B. This seem to be good. Krech argued not only big animals but plants, insects etc. were also extinct - noting humans prob didnt cause them. But B shows that humans were using them so it weakens the argument they weren't harming those things.

Passage explicitly says - Krech attributes secondary responsibility to humans. 'B' supports Krech in that small animals & plants also extincted.[/quote]
small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption

C says that humans consumed small species too, and hence they were responsible for the extinction.
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 314
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 319 [0], given: 9

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2009, 00:35
what's the source of this question?
Manager
Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Posts: 163
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 50 [0], given: 8

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2009, 04:12
IMO B...
Director
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 850
WE 1: 7years (Financial Services - Consultant, BA)
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 310 [0], given: 106

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2009, 09:11
IMO C.
Economist wrote:
Passage explicitly says - Krech attributes secondary responsibility to humans. 'B' supports Krech in that small animals & plants also extincted. small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption

C says that humans consumed small species too, and hence they were responsible for the extinction.

B is in line with the argument of Krech.

Krech said climatic change is not included in the Martin's theory and it could be the reason for the extinction of the species.
C says that climatic changes happened before too but did not result in the extinction of the species.
* ===> Only issue here I see is that we need to make an assumption in C that similar wave of extinction did not happen in the previous and subsequent eras.*
still C is the best option here.
Opinions please!
_________________

Consider kudos for the good post ...
My debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/journey-670-to-720-q50-v36-long-85083.html

Senior Manager
Joined: 27 May 2009
Posts: 282
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 356 [0], given: 18

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2009, 10:41
IMO C.. wat is the OA
Intern
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Sep 2009, 12:31
Situation:

Paul Martin believes that the arrival of humans i.e. the Paleoindians were the responsible factor for species extinction
Shepard Krech believes that the human is not the primary responsible factors for the species extinctions, climate is.

What will weaken Krech's objection/belief?

If the climate changes that is claimed to have cause extinction had been there before the humans arrived, and the species were still there when the humans arrived, the climate changes clearly did not cause the extinction. This finding therefore weaken Krech's belief that climate was the responsible factor.

A The severity of the climate changes were not linked to the extinction, this could strengthen Krech's belief
B The indication that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects does not indicate that human hunt (cause extinction) and made use of them.
C This clearly weaken Krech's belief by stating that the similar climate changes that took place before human arrivals did not cause the extinction
D The argument focus on the cause of the extinction, not on the number of extinct species
E The earlier indication of human arrival and Pleistocene extinctions further complicate the argument

IMO C
Manager
Joined: 28 Aug 2009
Posts: 196
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 1

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Sep 2009, 13:45
perfectstranger wrote:
According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, the wave of species extinctions that occurred Line in North America about 11,000 years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene era, can be directly attributed to the arrival of humans, i.e., the Paleoindians, who were ancestors of modern Native Americans. However, anthropologist Shepard Krech points out that large animal species vanished even in areas where there is no evidence to demon-strate that Paleoindians hunted them.Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption. Krech also contradicts Martin’s exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene. Still, Krech attributes secondary if not primary responsibility for the extinctions to the Paleoindians, arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Krech’s objections to Martin’s theory?

A. Further studies showing that the climatic change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe and widespread than was previously believed
B. New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct
C. Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras
D. Researchers’ discoveries that many more species became extinct in North America at the end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed
E. New discoveries establishing that both the arrival of humans in North America and the wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago

Please explain in a detailed way.Nice explanation will be appreciated with kudos ) . OA after explanations.

A. Further studies showing that the climatic change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe and widespread than was previously believed
Strengthens rather than weaken "Krech also contradicts Martin’s exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene"B. New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct
CORRECT..."Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption"
C. Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras
Nowwhere does that passage say that Kretch considers CLIMATIC CHANGES as the primary factor for human exinction.That will be an over-inference.
D. Researchers’ discoveries that many more species became extinct in North America at the end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed "OUT OF CONTEXT"E. New discoveries establishing that both the arrival of humans in North America and the wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago "DOESNOT WEAKEN KRETCH'S OBJECTIONS"
SVP
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1672
Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Followers: 33

Kudos [?]: 514 [0], given: 36

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 May 2011, 23:53
The OA is B, please see here :

http://www.beatthegmat.com/martin-s-theory-t50855.html
_________________

Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1353
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 240 [0], given: 10

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 May 2011, 02:50
clean B here.
Tussle between B and C,where C attributes extinction to climate while B does to humans.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 649
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 219 [0], given: 51

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 May 2011, 09:03
took me almost 3:30 min to finalize B.
_________________

What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.

Manager
Status: Completed GMAT on 22 Nov 2011
Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Posts: 167
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 12

Re: Shepard Krech [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2011, 04:30
IMO C
Manager
Joined: 26 Jan 2014
Posts: 71
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 77

Re: According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Feb 2014, 19:36
Here is my explaination why B is better than C. Hope it helps.

The following sentence in the paragraph is about C.

Krech also contradicts Martin’s exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene.

Martin:this extinction has no relationship with climate change.
Krech:this extinction has relationship with climate change:occur at THE END OF the Pleistocene.

Here is C.
Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras.

If the climate change happened in PREVIOUS AND SUBSEQUENT eras, then we can assume that the extinction should be early,according to the words by Krech. right? But it happened at the end of the Pleistocene era. So the climate have no connection with the extinction.So we can exclude this factor, i.e. , Krech was wrong and Martin was right. C is wrong.
Intern
Joined: 03 May 2014
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2014, 19:57
Samsmalldog

I think most of your reasoning is right. If C is true, then Krech is wrong. Doesn't C weaken Krech's objection already?

Can someone clarify this question please. I am super confused. Thanks
Intern
Joined: 19 Feb 2014
Posts: 9
GMAT Date: 06-24-2014
GPA: 2.75
WE: Project Management (Manufacturing)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 7

Re: According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2014, 21:36
A. Further studies showing that the climatic change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe a
nd widespread than was previously blieved

B. New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct - correct! Clearly contradicts to the information given above.

C. Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras
D. Researchers’ discoveries that many more species became extinct in North America at the end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed
E. New discoveries establishing that both the arrival of humans in North America and the wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago
Current Student
Joined: 11 Oct 2013
Posts: 124
Concentration: Marketing, General Management
GMAT 1: 600 Q41 V31
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 137

Re: According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2015, 10:07
perfectstranger wrote:
According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, the wave of species extinctions that occurred Line in North America about 11,000 years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene era, can be directly attributed to the arrival of humans, i.e., the Paleoindians, who were ancestors of modern Native Americans. However, anthropologist Shepard Krech points out that large animal species vanished even in areas where there is no evidence to demon-strate that Paleoindians hunted them.Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption. Krech also contradicts Martin’s exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene. Still, Krech attributes secondary if not primary responsibility for the extinctions to the Paleoindians, arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Krech’s objections to Martin’s theory?

A. Further studies showing that the climatic change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe and widespread than was previously believed
B. New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct
C. Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras
D. Researchers’ discoveries that many more species became extinct in North America at the end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed
E. New discoveries establishing that both the arrival of humans in North America and the wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago

Please explain in a detailed way.Nice explanation will be appreciated with kudos ) . OA after explanations.

carcass - Can you help explain why B is the correct answer. OA is B. Is it because its correct, or is it because its the best choice?
The passage says
"Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption."

Answer Choice B says
"New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct "

While the passage says not all were through human consumption, how does B weaken it? It does not tell us if it was a considerable consumption!
_________________

Its not over..

Re: According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin,   [#permalink] 02 Dec 2015, 10:07
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
According to recent research 0 21 Oct 2016, 07:51
According to the tragedy of the commons theory, drinking 9 05 Apr 2011, 16:01
14 According to psychoanalytic theory, people have unconscious 36 14 May 2009, 21:12
5 According to psychoanalytic theory, people have unconscious 27 21 Mar 2009, 11:09
According to psychoanalytic theory, people have unconscious 2 20 Aug 2008, 21:59
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin,

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.