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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

100% (01:27) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

Meteorologists say that if only they could design an accurate mathematical model of the atmosphere with all its complexities, they could forecast the weather with real precision. But this is an idle boast, immune to any evaluation, for any inadequate weather forecast would obviously be blamed on imperfections in the model.

Which of the following, if true, could best be used as a basis for arguing against the authorâ€™s position that the meteorologistsâ€™ claim cannot be evaluated?

(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts.

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.

(D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time.

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct

My reasoning -
(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood. - A model that supports on some configurations is therefore not that accurate.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts. - The autor is interested in the ones that do not end up with clear gains in the precision of the weather forecasts. In the sense that how will they be explained - again by saying that in that scenario the model is not an accurate representation?

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.
- Are beginning to be constructed but do not say that they will be successfull and therefore may/ may not resort to excuses like an imperfect representation

(D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time. - Irrelevant

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct - If an accurate model can be constructed then the meteorologists will not be able to escape by blaming an inaccurate model for their faulty predictions since they have already classified it as accurate

My reasoning -
(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood. - A model that supports on some configurations is therefore not that accurate.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts. - The autor is interested in the ones that do not end up with clear gains in the precision of the weather forecasts. In the sense that how will they be explained - again by saying that in that scenario the model is not an accurate representation?

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.
- Are beginning to be constructed but do not say that they will be successfull and therefore may/ may not resort to excuses like an imperfect representation

(D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time. - Irrelevant

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct - If an accurate model can be constructed then the meteorologists will not be able to escape by blaming an inaccurate model for their faulty predictions since they have already classified it as accurate

My reasoning -
(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood. - A model that supports on some configurations is therefore not that accurate.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts. - The autor is interested in the ones that do not end up with clear gains in the precision of the weather forecasts. In the sense that how will they be explained - again by saying that in that scenario the model is not an accurate representation?

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.
- Are beginning to be constructed but do not say that they will be successfull and therefore may/ may not resort to excuses like an imperfect representation

(D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time. - Irrelevant

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct - If an accurate model can be constructed then the meteorologists will not be able to escape by blaming an inaccurate model for their faulty predictions since they have already classified it as accurate

Meteorologists say that if only they could design an accurate mathematical model of the atmosphere with all its complexities, they could forecast the weather with real precision. But this is an idle boast, immune to any evaluation, for any inadequate weather forecast would obviously be blamed on imperfections in the model.

Which of the following, if true, could best be used as a basis for arguing against the authorâ€™s position that the meteorologistsâ€™ claim cannot be evaluated?

(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts.

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.

(D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time.

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct

B

The key lies in the Question Stem "arguing against the authorâ€™s position "
Authers claim , accuracy cannot be evaluated.
B states that improvements in accuracy is accompanied by clear gains in precision. So contrary to authors claim, accuracy can be evaluated.

Last edited by ivymba on 28 Sep 2006, 08:11, edited 1 time in total.

Re: CR - Meteorologists [#permalink]
28 Aug 2014, 18:41

eteorologists say that if only they could design an accurate mathematical model of the atmosphere with all its complexities, they could forecast the weather with real precision. But this is an idle boast, immune to any evaluation, for any inadequate weather forecast would obviously be blamed on imperfections in the model.

Which of the following, if true, could best be used as a basis for arguing against the authorâ€™s position that the meteorologistsâ€™ claim cannot be evaluated?

Note: Its a weakner question. Conclusion : Scientists claim can't be evaluated. Assumption: There is not possible way to determine the accuracy of weather prediction.

(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood. -- Strengthens. Basically it says you dont need a universal model. But prediction can be done accurately. We need lower the belief that prediction can't be evaluated

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts. This is right answer. We have perfect formula to measure success of the prediction.

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed. out of scope. What happens in the technology world of meteorlogical is out of scope of conclusoin. The model can't evaluate. (D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time. Talks about forecasts but not about evaluation . At best, strengthenes

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct Stregthens by saying that Meteorologists simply can't arrive this model on their own. What is the impact on evaluaton nothing

gmatclubot

Re: CR - Meteorologists
[#permalink]
28 Aug 2014, 18:41

The Cambridge open day wasn’t quite what I was used to; no sample lectures, no hard and heavy approach; and it even started with a sandwich lunch. Overall...

I couldn’t help myself but stay impressed. young leader who can now basically speak Chinese and handle things alone (I’m Korean Canadian by the way, so...