Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 20 Jan 2017, 19:32

### 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

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

# Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Mar 2010
Posts: 440
Schools: Simon '16 (M)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 269 [2] , given: 22

Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2011, 05:39
2
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (02:52) correct 44% (01:21) wrong based on 664 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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. Nevertheless, some indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere. After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but 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 is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.
B. The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim.
C. The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
E. The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.

Can someone please help me understand this CR question? I just can't seem to understand Bo(w)l(e)d-Face CR.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

My dad once said to me: Son, nothing succeeds like success.

If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 203
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 118 [0], given: 21

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2011, 10:27
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
a) (wrong) - the first statement is not a claim which author wants to prove, it is in fact a affirmative statement, a report made after analyses. so it is in fact a premise and we have to take premise as true is cr questions.

b) (wrong) we can eliminate this with same reason as A.

d) (wrong) second statement is not a conclusion but a prediction which logically flows under a certain circumstance (i.e - if comet fragments
had penetrated this cloud layer). so this is wrong.

e) (wrong) the second statement does not contradicts the explanation which astronomer wants to provide. In fact second statement is part of this explanation.

At this point we have eliminated 4 wrong choices so automatically C becomes a strong option. In boldfaced questions I have seen that 4 wrong choices are more easy to pick than the right choice.

Now C is definitely right in this case. The conclusion of the argument is 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. This is basically a judgment from author (it is likely - a CONCLUSION INDICATOR phrase.....) Now both statement 1 and 2 provide considerations which take us to this conclusion. hence C is the right answer.
Director
Status: Prep started for the n-th time
Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Posts: 707
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 166 [0], given: 37

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2011, 17:26
C for me as well.

None of the bold faces are conclusions.

Crick
Manager
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 240
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 205 [0], given: 8

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2011, 18:18
I basically used the process of elimination here.
From the bold statements, I know that both are some sort of evidence. Hence I can eliminate A, B, and D immediately.
For E, the second evidence supports the explanation as opposed to go "against" the explanation.
Hence, I chose C.
Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Mar 2010
Posts: 440
Schools: Simon '16 (M)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 269 [0], given: 22

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2011, 08:54
Thanks guys. I guess i need more practice with Bold Face questions.
_________________

My dad once said to me: Son, nothing succeeds like success.

Intern
Joined: 22 Jun 2011
Posts: 9
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 2

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2011, 10:09
The problem with arms reduction is that it is an illusory concept benefitting none. Even though designated stockpiles are being reduced, the weapons race continues, as the destructive power of new technologies and remaining arsenals is enhanced in order to maintain the pre-existing firepower. Thus, although it fosters an illusion of progress, arms reduction does nothing to curtail the proliferation of weaponry, and all must continue to live under the constant threat of annihilation.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author's argument?

A) Arms reduction allows steady maintenance of the existing balance of power.

B) No arms limitation proposals have aimed at completely eliminating a nation's armament stockpile.

C) The five largest military powers have increased funding for new weapons in each of the last ten years.

D) The distinction between offensive and defensive weapon systems is often merely a matter of interpretation.

E) Arms limitation treaties have only accounted for the elimination of fiteen percent of the total firepower possessed by the five largest military powers.
_________________

TO LIVE ONE LIFE , YOU HAVE TO DIE HUNDRED DEATHS....

Manager
Joined: 09 Jun 2011
Posts: 92
Followers: 0

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

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2011, 08:48
C..
Manager
Joined: 09 Jun 2011
Posts: 145
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 1

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2011, 11:56
Yup C here..By POE..
Manager
Status: Prepping for the last time....
Joined: 28 May 2010
Posts: 200
Location: Australia
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GPA: 3.2
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 21

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2011, 01:00
C is the best... POE
_________________

Two great challenges: 1. Guts to Fail and 2. Fear to Succeed

Intern
Joined: 02 Apr 2012
Posts: 2
Followers: 0

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

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2012, 09:30
raghavakumar85 wrote:
C is the best... POE

HOW DID u eliminate B?

I guess B is the ri8 answer
Manager
Joined: 16 Mar 2010
Posts: 58
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 4

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2012, 11:55
Answer is C by POE, B is wrong since the paragraph does not talk about arms limitations.
Senior Manager
Joined: 30 Jun 2011
Posts: 274
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 20

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2012, 03:10
gmatrakesh wrote:
raghavakumar85 wrote:
C is the best... POE

HOW DID u eliminate B?

I guess B is the ri8 answer

B says The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim.

The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true... 1st is a claim BUT astronomer is showing it to be true, it is assumed to be true

the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim... 2nd does not support 1st, in fact 2nd support conclusion
Retired Moderator
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1712
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Followers: 97

Kudos [?]: 914 [0], given: 109

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2012, 21:10
+1 C

Both statements are simple premises.
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 201
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 22

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2012, 22:25
Very good explanation given by Aj85

Chose B as the first statement looked as if its a claim. But later realised that both statements are part of the premise.

Thanks for the question.
Intern
Joined: 05 Apr 2012
Posts: 42
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 12

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2012, 08:23
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. Nevertheless, some
indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer
atmosphere. After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented
traces of sulfur.
The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but
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
, 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 is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second

acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.
B. The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides
evidence in support of the truth of that claim.
C. The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the
conclusion of the argument.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the
second is that conclusion.
E. The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an
explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.

Can someone please help me understand this CR question? I just can't seem to understand Bo(w)l(e)d-Face CR.

1 diagraming
the conclusion is :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

evidences to support
the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere
the comet fragment size was revealed by analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere with unprecedent level of sulfurs
not coming from the fragment themselves but from jupiter cloud layer

2. ANALYSE proposed choices
a wrong : both evidences are going in the same direction ,
b wrong it is not a claim not a conclusion
c ok
d it is not the conclusion
e no consideration given
they are completing ; the second one is not a counterpremise

hope this help

best regards

keira
VP
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 1401
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 114 [0], given: 812

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jun 2012, 01:27
BOLD PHRASE- TIME

it take me a long time to solve bold phrase, 2 minute for understanding argument. 1 minutes for reading answer choices. Above question takes me 3 minute to understand the argument, 20 second for reading answer choices. total 3minute 20 second.

how to improve the time.

pls, help
BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 912
Location: Viet Nam
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Followers: 73

Kudos [?]: 602 [0], given: 44

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jun 2012, 01:49
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
@thangvietnam: Understanding the over all or general idea of CR boldface question is unavoidable. The first thing you need is to read the international news everyday. You will become familiar with the relation between sentences...

Furthermore, The below link maybe useful to you to learn how to solve the CR boldface more effectively :D. Just enjoy it.

_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Senior Manager
Status: Juggg..Jugggg Go!
Joined: 11 May 2012
Posts: 254
Location: India
GC Meter: A.W.E.S.O.M.E
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
GMAT 1: 620 Q46 V30
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V38
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 239

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jun 2012, 04:35
Marked c first.. then moved to E :-/
_________________

You haven't failed, if you haven't given up!
---

Check out my other posts:
Bschool Deadlines 2013-2014 | Bschool Admission Events 2013 Start your GMAT Prep with Stacey Koprince | Get a head start in MBA finance

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10534
Followers: 919

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Aug 2014, 00:20
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Intern
Joined: 15 Feb 2016
Posts: 10
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 3

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Feb 2016, 04:14
A. The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.
B. The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim.
C. The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
E. The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.

The first is not a claim that the author is trying to prove. It is an observed fact. A, B are out.
D: The second is not the conclusion. The conclusion is about how big the fragments were. D is out.
E: The second helps in reaching the conclusion and does not weight against the explanation. E is out.
That leaves C
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its   [#permalink] 20 Feb 2016, 04:14

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 21 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 When astronomers observed the comet Steinman-Arnet 3 becoming 1,000 2 28 Sep 2015, 10:45
6 When astronomers observed the comet Schwassman- Wachmann 3 4 12 Jul 2014, 10:50
7 Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its 14 21 Dec 2012, 03:02
10 Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its 10 20 Nov 2011, 20:07
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its 9 07 Jul 2007, 16:42
Display posts from previous: Sort by