Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

 It is currently 10 Oct 2015, 05:47

### 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

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

# Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil

Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 168
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 5

Re: CR: gold content [#permalink]  21 Dec 2010, 14:46
chelliyil wrote:
Frobisher could have mistakely examined for gold on any other island as well too. In that case D would be a choice. Please explain why this option is out.

You cannot assume information that isn't stated in the question. With the given information, she/he/whoever draws the conclusion that the method was innaccurate.

There are many things that could have happened but only the things mentioned in the text are valid for the argument
_________________

12/2010 GMATPrep 1 620 (Q34/V41)
01/2011 GMATPrep 2 640 (Q42/V36)
01/2011 GMATPrep 3 700 (Q47/V39)
02/2011 GMATPrep 4 710 (Q48/V39)
02/2011 MGMAT CAT 1 650 (Q46/V32)
02/2011 MGMAT CAT 2 680 (Q46/V36)
02/2011 MGMAT CAT 3 710 (Q45/V41)

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 5972
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 1528

Kudos [?]: 8451 [0], given: 194

Re: CR: gold content [#permalink]  21 Dec 2010, 18:05
Expert's post
chelliyil wrote:
Frobisher could have mistakely examined for gold on any other island as well too. In that case D would be a choice. Please explain why this option is out.

The argument says that he got soil from Kodlunarn island examined. The Queen sent two expeditions there. The argument does not have anything to do with the other islands. It does not assume that he did not get soil of any other island examined. Perhaps he did and found no gold there or perhaps he did find gold there. We do not know and do not care as far as this argument goes. Here we are only concerned with Kodlunarn.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199 Veritas Prep Reviews Manager Status: I am Midnight's Child ! Joined: 04 Dec 2009 Posts: 148 WE 1: Software Design and Development Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 50 [0], given: 11 Re: CR: gold content [#permalink] 26 Dec 2010, 12:06 fiesta wrote: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? (A) The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century. (B) The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island. (C) The methods used to assess gold content of the soil samples provided by Frobisher were different from those generally used in the sixteenth century. (D) Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content. (E) Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined. Clearly E. _________________ Argument : If you love long trips, you love the GMAT. Conclusion : GMAT is long journey. What does the author assume ? Assumption : A long journey is a long trip. GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings Senior Manager Joined: 19 Oct 2010 Posts: 272 Location: India GMAT 1: 560 Q36 V31 GPA: 3 Followers: 6 Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 27 Re: CR: gold content [#permalink] 10 Jan 2011, 08:22 suesie970 wrote: 321kumarsushant wrote: can anyone please explain why C is not a correct option?? i am agree with C. E doesn't make sense to me. can any one tell me, where can i find the correct solution of this question apart from this discussion.? 321kumarsushant: Option C says that when Frobisher examined the soil sample for gold he used a different method than anyone else was using back in the 1500s . Even if this is true, this statement does not affect the conclusion at all. If choice C said "The methods used to assess gold content of the soil samples provided by Frobisher were different from those generally used in the twenty first century.", then it would be a contender for the correct answer. Hope that helps. E clearly. It's the only one that strays from the original line of the passage. Susie, That amendment to option C was a good addition. _________________ petrifiedbutstanding Manager Joined: 21 Nov 2010 Posts: 133 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 12 Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil [#permalink] 01 Dec 2011, 23:32 +1 E BSchool Forum Moderator Status: Flying over the cloud! Joined: 16 Aug 2011 Posts: 861 Location: Viet Nam Concentration: International Business, Marketing GMAT Date: 06-06-2014 GPA: 3.07 Followers: 63 Kudos [?]: 369 [0], given: 44 Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil [#permalink] 02 Dec 2011, 19:14 +1 E _________________ 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 Manager Joined: 10 Jan 2011 Posts: 244 Location: India GMAT Date: 07-16-2012 GPA: 3.4 WE: Consulting (Consulting) Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 25 Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil [#permalink] 05 Dec 2011, 01:06 IMO E _________________ -------Analyze why option A in SC wrong------- Senior Manager Joined: 12 Oct 2011 Posts: 274 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 110 Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil [#permalink] 23 Dec 2011, 05:12 E it is. Nice question but E stands out as the assumption. _________________ Consider KUDOS if you feel the effort's worth it Manager Joined: 07 Aug 2011 Posts: 186 Location: United States Concentration: Technology, International Business GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V37 Followers: 3 Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 6 Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil [#permalink] 26 Dec 2011, 02:32 Yes E its very simple. We need to SUPPORT the assumption that METHOD USED TO TEST GOLD CONTENT was inaccurate. E ) clearly states that Sample was not wrong and no gold was added to the sample .. so he had sample which had no gold yet his study showed gold was present Intern Joined: 16 Nov 2012 Posts: 4 Location: Switzerland Concentration: General Management, Social Entrepreneurship GPA: 3.11 WE: Architecture (Computer Software) Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0 Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil [#permalink] 29 Nov 2012, 11:23 It's been assumed that the method was wrong considering no gold was added. Intern Joined: 04 Aug 2013 Posts: 10 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 7 Re: CR: gold content [#permalink] 25 Nov 2013, 16:57 Hey Karishma, But why not D? Thanks VeritasPrepKarishma wrote: fiesta wrote: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? (A) The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century. (B) The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island. (C) The methods used to assess gold content of the soil samples provided by Frobisher were different from those generally used in the sixteenth century. (D) Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content. (E) Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined. Let us read the question stem first. We are looking for an assumption. An assumption is a necessary missing premise. We are looking for the option that needs to be true for the conclusion to be true. Premises: Frobisher had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Tell me, when you read the above premises, what possibilities come to mind? Frobisher had samples examined. High gold content was reported. No gold was actually found. Modern analysis show very low gold content. The following possibilities come to my mind: 1. Either there was gold and before the expeditions were sent, it was mined (very unlikely!) 2. His methods were inaccurate. 3. Someone had added gold to the soil he tested. Conclusion: The methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate. If I am concluding that his methods were inaccurate, then I am assuming that no one added gold to his samples and gold was not mined before the expeditions were sent. (Technically, gold could have been added and his methods could have been inaccurate too but lets not mess with that.) Hence option (E) is an assumption. Also, use you can use assumption negation technique to see that it is the right answer. I negate (E) : Gold was added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined. I can not conclude now that his methods were inaccurate. Hence (E) is the correct answer. Option (C) is not correct. We did not assume in the argument that his methods were different. They could have been the same ones generally used in the 16th century, It is possible that 16th century methods were not accurate. Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor Joined: 16 Oct 2010 Posts: 5972 Location: Pune, India Followers: 1528 Kudos [?]: 8451 [0], given: 194 Re: CR: gold content [#permalink] 27 Nov 2013, 22:42 Expert's post Manager Joined: 09 Apr 2013 Posts: 147 Location: India WE: Supply Chain Management (Consulting) Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 60 [0], given: 18 Re: CR: gold content [#permalink] 28 Nov 2013, 01:57 How could D be a choice? Negate D and check. Frobisher has soil samples from other Canadian island examined for gold content. Even though he has examined soil samples from other islands, his method could still be inaccurate. Thus D would not hurt the conclusion by negation. Answer is E. _________________ +1 KUDOS is the best way to say thanks "Those, who never do any more than they get paid for, never get paid for any more than they do" Manager Joined: 20 Oct 2013 Posts: 79 Location: United States Concentration: General Management, Real Estate Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 13 Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil [#permalink] 03 Dec 2013, 06:08 Look at 5 choices: A) Doesn't support the conclusion: lower gold content today suggests that finding low gold content doesn't imply the inaccuracy of the method. B) Same as A: "didn't mine the same part" => cannot conclude anything about the method's accuracy C) out of scope: "the method generally used in the 16th century" is irrelevant. Such a comparison between 2 methods provides no help. D) The statement is not enough for us to establish any inference about the method mentioned in the original argument E) Using negation technique: What happens if this stat isn't true? As gold was added to the samples before they were checked, the reported high gold content is due to fraudulence (my own idea!), rather than the method's inaccuracy => invalidate the conclusion. Pick E. Manager Joined: 24 Jun 2013 Posts: 63 Schools: ISB '16, NUS '15 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 45 Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil [#permalink] 16 May 2014, 06:12 Hi Chiranjeev, The conclusion of the argument questioned the accuracy of the method used by Frobisher . keeping this in mind. in option D states after negation that Frobisher soil sample is taken form an other canadian island. So doesnt weaken the conclusion. or firstly it is like it doesn't say anything about the from where does the modern analysis has taken soil sample it might be from the same place and secondly in conclusion we are taking about the Method only. Is my understanding correct? one more question ,generally in assumption question , if any option shatters the premise, or weakens the premise or just a we get obtain statement after negation which is just the opposite of the given premises does that statement is a valid assumption. i think it won't fall into the category of new information ,and secondly it should be related to the conclusion ,this could be reasons for not considering the statement as a valid assumption correct me where I'm wrong. Thanks Nitin Singh Senior Manager Joined: 28 Apr 2014 Posts: 291 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 46 Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil [#permalink] 06 Aug 2014, 00:41 VeritasPrepKarishma wrote: fiesta wrote: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? (A) The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century. (B) The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island. (C) The methods used to assess gold content of the soil samples provided by Frobisher were different from those generally used in the sixteenth century. (D) Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content. (E) Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined. Let us read the question stem first. We are looking for an assumption. An assumption is a necessary missing premise. We are looking for the option that needs to be true for the conclusion to be true. Premises: Frobisher had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Tell me, when you read the above premises, what possibilities come to mind? Frobisher had samples examined. High gold content was reported. No gold was actually found. Modern analysis show very low gold content. The following possibilities come to my mind: 1. Either there was gold and before the expeditions were sent, it was mined (very unlikely!) 2. His methods were inaccurate. 3. Someone had added gold to the soil he tested. Conclusion: The methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate. If I am concluding that his methods were inaccurate, then I am assuming that no one added gold to his samples and gold was not mined before the expeditions were sent. (Technically, gold could have been added and his methods could have been inaccurate too but lets not mess with that.) Hence option (E) is an assumption. Also, use you can use assumption negation technique to see that it is the right answer. I negate (E) : Gold was added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined. I can not conclude now that his methods were inaccurate. Hence (E) is the correct answer. Option (C) is not correct. We did not assume in the argument that his methods were different. They could have been the same ones generally used in the 16th century, It is possible that 16th century methods were not accurate. Karishma , can I paraphrase the above highlighted explanation as Negative E - Gold was added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined. Now that if gold was added before examination and the examination rightly pointed this out - it clearly shows that the technical method to determine the gold content was not in-accurate ( though the step of fudging sample was morally wrong but that is altogether a different matter) So negating assumption , destroys the conclusion , hence E it is Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor Joined: 16 Oct 2010 Posts: 5972 Location: Pune, India Followers: 1528 Kudos [?]: 8451 [0], given: 194 Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil [#permalink] 07 Aug 2014, 02:02 Expert's post himanshujovi wrote: Karishma , can I paraphrase the above highlighted explanation as Negative E - Gold was added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined. Now that if gold was added before examination and the examination rightly pointed this out - it clearly shows that the technical method to determine the gold content was not in-accurate ( though the step of fudging sample was morally wrong but that is altogether a different matter) So negating assumption , destroys the conclusion , hence E it is Yes, that's correct. If Gold was added, we don't know who did it so we cannot blame Frobisher or his methods. All we know is that his methods to determine gold content could have been accurate. _________________ Karishma Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor My Blog Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil   [#permalink] 07 Aug 2014, 02:02

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 37 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
3 Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil 13 12 Apr 2011, 01:25
Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil 6 19 Nov 2007, 11:52
Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil 6 23 Sep 2007, 18:47
Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil 3 24 Nov 2005, 00:49
Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil 8 06 Nov 2005, 11:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by