|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1255
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on - Q1 [#permalink]
 14 Dec 2004, 06:25
Question Stats:
80% (01:10) correct
20% (00:00) wrong based on 5 sessions
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out. The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms? (A) It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars (B) it fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth (C) It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth. (D) It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria. (E) It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out. Note: There are two questions available with the similar stimulus and same first line but different question. The other question (complete the passage) is discussed in: it-is-theoretically-possible-that-bacteria-developed-on-q2-46449.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 07 Nov 2004
Posts: 728
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
Pick D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 738
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
3
[0], given: 0
|
D seems to be perfect..
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 1026
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
One more for 'D'
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 772
Location: Milwaukee
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
D sounds ok
_________________
Praveen
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 1089
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
chun, could you please post the OA to this question? I am leaning towards C
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Oct 2004
Posts: 102
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
I would also pick D. The argument fails to condisder whether all bacteria came from Mars...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 715
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
69
[0], given: 0
|
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars [#permalink]
06 Apr 2008, 05:33
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out. The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms? A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars. B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth. C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth. D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria. E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.
_________________
Persistence+Patience+Persistence+Patience=G...O...A...L
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 330
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 0
|
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.
The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars. irrevelant
B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth. irrevelant
C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth. irrevelant
D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.
The argument reports about 'strains of bacteria from different planets'
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.
It could well be that all the bacteria living on Earth derived from Mars and the bacteria from Earth died out! Correct answer!
Cheers,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 760
Location: Oxford
Schools: Oxford'10
Followers: 11
Kudos [?]:
148
[0], given: 8
|
prasannar wrote: It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.
The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars. The argument says "even ig bacteria did arrive on earth", so this point is irrelevant since we are assuming Mars had bacteria and it got to earth.
B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth. Again, we have to assume that bacteria got transported to earth, since this is the basis of the argument.
C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth. its irrelevant how Martian bacteria got to earth.
D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria. The argument says that martian bacteria that arrived on earth died out. But this choice makes it possible that martian bacteria thrived on earth and didn't die out.
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out. this is irrelevant since we are trying to find out something that is against it arguement, i.e martian bacteria died out. This statement says nothing about martian bacteria
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 330
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 0
|
Any other thoughts? D or E? What is OA?
cheers,
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2998
Followers: 48
Kudos [?]:
390
[0], given: 210
|
I agree with D. Will explain further if its correct. I must say its a nasty one - both E and D do sound plausible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 461
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
19
[0], given: 6
|
Well I would go with D .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 07 Apr 2008
Posts: 1
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
I would go with E. D talks abt spawning of an Earth-version bacteria from the Martian one. In tht case they would have the same biological/DNA/RNA (blah blah  ) structure.. E is correct as it explores a possibility of the existence of a pure-Earth-version (born & brought up on earth :D) which would be biologically different from the martian version. Hence E.. :D Any counter arguments?? the stigscousin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 461
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
19
[0], given: 6
|
whats the OA?
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1478
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
70
[0], given: 0
|
E If e is true, then there were bacteria with different enough in protien structure, it is just that they died out. This means we cant determine if the bacteria are from mars or not. I didt pick d because stem says bacteria on earth exist prasannar wrote: It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.
The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars.
B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth.
C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth.
D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 07 Apr 2008
Posts: 22
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
A- hmm.. B-irrelevant to arg C-irrelevant D-irrelevant E-hmm.. To summarize&confirm: What is the arg ? "even if the bac arrived frm MArs, they must have died " LOok at A and E now...E hints that bac developed on earth might hv died !..and bac frm Mars survived .. possible! Next, A is true as fact but A doesn't weaken the arg ..arg scope is: bac developed on Mars: may or may not but if they did, then they must have died on earth ( given the fact that structurally totally diff bac cant exist) which E negates..
I go with EI found this a lil tricky!! prasannar wrote: It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.
The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars.
B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth.
C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth.
D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 1447
Schools: Chicago Booth '11
Followers: 7
Kudos [?]:
136
[0], given: 12
|
E
Argument is making a conclusion that since all earth bacteria are not different enough they couldn't have arose from another planet.
However the argument fails to consider if previous strains of bacteria on earth that were different enough to have arose from another did exist on earth. (but died out which is why they are not around today)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 330
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 0
|
What is OA?
Cheers,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 77
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 3
|
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars [#permalink]
10 Jul 2009, 01:56
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.
The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars.
B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth.
C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth.
D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars
[#permalink]
10 Jul 2009, 01:56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
