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

 It is currently 05 May 2016, 15:34

### 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

# In the course of her researches, a historian recently found

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 40
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [2] , given: 0

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2004, 03:26
2
KUDOS
7
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

52% (02:33) correct 48% (01:41) wrong based on 588 sessions

### HideShow timer Statictics

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzler’s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?

(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719.
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling.
(C) The undated document was written before 1765.
(D) The arrest record was written after the undated document.
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4302
Followers: 33

Kudos [?]: 315 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2004, 08:31
C it is
A) If the undated document were dated 1750, then we cannot say that Schnitzler started peddling in 1719
B) He could have been arrested only once, in 1739
C) The most conservative answer. If the documents were simply written before 1765, it would account for the fact that Schnitzler was peddling on and off for the past 20 years. Say it was dated 1730, then Schnitzler was at least peddling on in 1739. Say it was dated 1750, then again we can say that Schnitzler was at least peddling on in 1739.
D) As said in C, the document could have been written in 1750. We cannot say that it was written after the undated document for sure
E) Nothing ascertains the veracity of each document. The undated document could have been an official court order or something the like
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Manager
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 179
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2004, 14:37
I prefer E,

Lets assume the undated document was written in 1964. It just misses 1939 by far 4 years.

Even I can contradict my logic here by saying that undated doesnt specify that he was peddling for exactly 20 yrs... But...

Any counter thoughts ?
Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 96
Location: Santa Clara
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR: Peddling (its a Mindbender) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2004, 15:26
keyV wrote:
In the course of her researches, a historian recently
found two documents mentioning the same person,
Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a
record of Schnitzlerâ€™s arrest for peddling without a
license. The second, undated, is a statement by
Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off
and on for 20 years.

The facts above best support which of the following
conclusions?
(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719.
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling.
(C) The undated document was written before 1765.
(D) The arrest record was written after the undated
document.
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that
Schnitzler peddled than does the undated
document.

This is not an assumption question. Given the evidence above, A can be concluded no?
Record in 1739.
Been peddling for 20 years
Can't you conclude that 'he started peddling around 1719?
E seems too extreme no? we have no way to tell that one is better evidence than the other.
_________________

"Do or do not, there is no try."
-Yoda

Intern
Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 40
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2004, 16:30
OA is B.

I don't understand it.... Explanations appreciated.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4302
Followers: 33

Kudos [?]: 315 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2004, 16:58
Please double check OA. It should be C. Here is the link
http://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=5786
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Intern
Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 40
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

26 Oct 2004, 02:46
OA is indeed C.

Thanks Paul. Sincere apologies to fellow gmatters. Was totally inadvertent...infact I was myself cracking my head open trying to justify B but to no avail....

at paul'suggestion i reopened the answer sheet and checked it again. it is C. the next q has answer B....and in the middle of the night when i was half asleep i must has mistaken it as the answer.
Senior Manager
Affiliations: CFA Level 2
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 266
Location: Hanoi
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 53 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Oct 2004, 04:05
I picked C. I don't like this question, it's too confusing and doesn't involve much thought.
_________________

"Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you'r gonna get"

Manager
Joined: 10 Sep 2005
Posts: 163
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2005, 13:31
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzlerâ€™s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?

(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719.
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling.
(C) The undated document was written before 1765.
The arrest record was written after the undated document.
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.
Director
Joined: 21 Aug 2005
Posts: 793
Followers: 2

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

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2005, 13:53
E for me

(A) No way to find this
(B) No mention in the arg. about repeated arrests
(C) Not mentioned/suggested
D) Cannot be verified
(E) Best choice. Arrest record is a better evidence than the undated document.
SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1811
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 92 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2005, 13:54
C is the only one making sense.
Manager
Joined: 10 Sep 2005
Posts: 163
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2005, 14:07
OA is C...but how ????
Director
Joined: 21 Aug 2005
Posts: 793
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 18 [1] , given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2005, 14:55
1
KUDOS
[quote="gsr"]E for me
quote]

I am being totally careless today! C sounds perfectly logical.

He was peddling for 20 years. Definitely he was doing it in 1739. So the range is 1719 - 1759, which is before 1765!
He can't claim in 1765 that he was pedd. for 20 years (starting 1745), because he was arrested in 1739 doing that!
Director
Joined: 09 Jul 2005
Posts: 595
Followers: 2

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

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2005, 14:59
A, B and E are out. C must be true either if Schnitzler was arrested before having pedding or after. D should be dissmised because we cann't conclude whether Schnitzler peddled before or after he was arrested.
Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2006
Posts: 366
Schools: Kellogg School of Management
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 3

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Apr 2006, 20:06
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzlerâ€™s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.
The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719.
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling.
(C) The undated document was written before 1765.
(D) The arrest record was written after the undated document.
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.
VP
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 1131
Location: India
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

25 Apr 2006, 20:15
Only C makes sense to me.

A------no surity about the year 1979 b'coz the statement is undated.
B------Only one arrest has happened for sure.
D------Same as A
E------Close one but C can be said for sure.
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 352
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

25 Apr 2006, 22:52
I will go with 'D'.
My reasoning.......

The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

This suggests that he had written this statement while he was still peddling.
Manager
Joined: 20 Jun 2005
Posts: 148
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Apr 2006, 01:21
zoom612 wrote:
I will go with 'D'.
My reasoning.......

The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

This suggests that he had written this statement while he was still peddling.

mm.. I do not think so. From the passage I can not exactly assume whether Schnitzler has written the 2nd document before or after the arrest event... He could have done it anytime...

Therefore, C answer could be the best...
Director
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 659
Location: London
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

26 Apr 2006, 03:34
I am going with C.

If the document was written after 1766 - 20 years before that would be 1746. ie. he should have started writing in 1746. But the other document was written in 1739. So, the second document should be well before 1765.
Manager
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 162
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2006, 01:57
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzlerâ€™s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.
The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719.
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling.
(C) The undated document was written before 1765.
(D) The arrest record was written after the undated document.
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.

A computer equipped with signature-recognition software, which restricts access to a computer to those people whose signatures are on file, identifies a personâ€™s signature by analyzing not only the form of the signature but also such characteristics as pen pressure and signing speed. Even the most adept forgers cannot duplicate all of the characteristics the program analyzes.
Which of the following can be logically concluded from the passage above?
(A) The time it takes to record and analyze a signature makes the software impractical for everyday use.
(B) Computers equipped with the software will soon be installed in most banks.
(C) Nobody can gain access to a computer equipped with the software solely by virtue of skill at forging signatures.
(D) Signature-recognition software has taken many years to develop and perfect.
(E) In many cases even authorized users are denied legitimate access to computers equipped with the software
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found   [#permalink] 25 Jun 2006, 01:57

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 50 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 8 30 Jul 2009, 04:08
3 In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 27 19 Aug 2008, 06:14
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 4 14 Sep 2006, 16:37
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 0 21 Jul 2006, 01:20
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 0 26 Jun 2006, 08:59
Display posts from previous: Sort by