It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on - Q1 : 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, 23:32

### 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

# It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on - Q1

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1218
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 607 [4] , given: 0

It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on - Q1 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Dec 2004, 05:25
4
KUDOS
21
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

25% (medium)

Question Stats:

67% (02:08) correct 33% (01:17) wrong based on 1240 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Director
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 905
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

27 Dec 2004, 17:12
chun, could you please post the OA to this question? I am leaning towards C
Manager
Joined: 24 Oct 2004
Posts: 96
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

27 Dec 2004, 17:48
I would also pick D. The argument fails to condisder whether all bacteria came from Mars...
Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 701
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 416 [0], given: 0

It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2008, 04:33
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: 329
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2008, 04:47
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: 758
Location: Oxford
Schools: Oxford'10
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 214 [5] , given: 8

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2008, 05:03
5
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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: 329
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 00:17
Any other thoughts? D or E? What is OA?

cheers,
CEO
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2989
Followers: 60

Kudos [?]: 581 [0], given: 210

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 04:28
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: 457
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 195 [0], given: 6

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 07:28
Well I would go with D .
Intern
Joined: 07 Apr 2008
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

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

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 07:41
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: 457
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 195 [0], given: 6

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 09:32
whats the OA?
VP
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1459
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 255 [0], given: 0

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 10:01
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

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 12:59
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 E

I 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: 1443
Schools: Chicago Booth '11
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 185 [0], given: 12

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 13:14
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: 329
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Apr 2008, 06:52
What is OA?

Cheers,
Manager
Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 76
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 93 [0], given: 3

It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2009, 00:56
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.
Director
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 897
Name: Ronak Amin
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Followers: 28

Kudos [?]: 645 [0], given: 18

Re: Bacteria from Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2009, 01:32
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
D.

Conclusion: Since there is only one type of bacteria on earth, Martian bacteria has died out ( implies that all bacteria on Earth are the ones that originated on Earth )

There might be a possibility that all bacteria on Earth died out and so current strain of bacteria on Earth is the one that came from Mars. D brings out this flaw.

ankur55 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.
Manager
Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 76
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 93 [0], given: 3

Re: Bacteria from Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2009, 01:38
thanks for the explanation.
D is the correct answer.
Director
Joined: 03 Jun 2009
Posts: 799
Location: New Delhi
WE 1: 5.5 yrs in IT
Followers: 84

Kudos [?]: 765 [0], given: 56

Re: Bacteria from Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2009, 01:40
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
D.

Evidence: All bacteria on earth is from "one source"
Conclusion: bacteria from Mars have died out.

Author seems to have assumed that this "one source" is "earth". Option D directly attacks this assumption, by saying that all the bacteria from earth have died. So this "one source" must be Mars.
_________________
Manager
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 158
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 11

Re: Bacteria from Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jul 2009, 01:00
+1 for D
Re: Bacteria from Mars   [#permalink] 23 Jul 2009, 01:00

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 46 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars 0 01 Mar 2012, 02:30
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars 0 25 Dec 2010, 07:43
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars 0 06 Mar 2011, 21:43
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars 0 09 Apr 2008, 06:52
10 It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on - Q2 14 01 Jun 2007, 15:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on - Q1

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.