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

It is currently 23 Oct 2014, 02:11

Close

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
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.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Jul 2003
Posts: 656
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 0

Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink] New post 27 Mar 2004, 18:08
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
11. Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the evolutionary theory that dinosaurs are more closely related to reptiles than to other classes of animals. Fossils show that some dinosaurs had hollow bones-a feature found today only in warm-blooded creatures, such as birds, that have a high metabolic rate. Dinosaurs had well-developed senses of sight and hearing, which is not true of present-day cold-blooded creatures like reptiles. The highly arched mouth roof of some dinosaurs would have permitted them to breathe while eating, as fast-breathing animals, such as birds, need to do. Today, all fast-breathing animals are warm-blooded. Finally, fossils reveal that many dinosaurs had a pattern of growth typical of warm-blooded animals.

The argument in the passage proceeds by

(A) attempting to justify one position by demonstrating that an opposing position is based on erroneous information

(B) establishing a general principle that it then uses to draw a conclusion about a particular case

(C) dismissing a claim made about the present on the basis of historical evidence

(D) assuming that if all members of a category have a certain property then all things with that property belong to the category

(E) presenting evidence that a past phenomenon is more similar to one rather than the other of two present-day phenomena


Could some one explain the difference between position, principle, claim, and phenomenon. I thought I know the difference, but this question proved me otherwise!
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4318
Followers: 23

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 27 Mar 2004, 23:55
E for me too
phenomena according to Webster dictionary: an observable fact or event
In this case, the past fact would be "dinosaurs" and the present two facts would be "reptiles" and "birds"
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1798
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 28 Mar 2004, 06:37
I feel D is convincing. I could not understand E but Paul's explanation is very nice.

The argument says that recently discovered fossil evidence ( of one dinosaur ) is more similar to birds than to any other aninal. If a generalization has to be made then it is necessary to assume that if one animal belongs to a catagory and all the animals with same characteristics must also belong to the same catagory.

Can any one refute this please...
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 50
Location: Singapore
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 28 Mar 2004, 07:38
Let me try to refute..

A snake is a reptile which bites.

Characteristic being "it bites".

A dog bit the boy.

=> Dog is a reptile ?

Specifically, with re to the choice D, draw two sets P (Mbr of same category) and Q (property), with Q as a superset of P.
All P is Q..but all Q is not P.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1798
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 28 Mar 2004, 07:48
hi ashwyn,

We are not debating whether the argument is wrong or right. The Q is asking how does the argument proceed.

Anand.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 50
Location: Singapore
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 28 Mar 2004, 08:19
[quote="anandnk"]I feel D is convincing. I could not understand E but Paul's explanation is very nice.

The argument says that recently discovered fossil evidence ( of one dinosaur ) is more similar to birds than to any other aninal. If a generalization has to be made then it is necessary to assume that if one animal belongs to a catagory and all the animals with same characteristics must also belong to the same catagory.

Can any one refute this please...[/quote]

Anand,

Pls read Option D again. There is a slight difference between ur statement above and choice D.

Choice D says- if ALL members of a category have a certain property then ALL THINGS with that property belong to the category

What u have stated is a REQD and necessary assumption, but this is not what is stated in Choice D.

Ur interpretatioin- if ONE animal belongs to a catagory and ALL animals with same characteristics must also belong to the same catagory.
is perfectly true and necessary.

Pls let me knw if the above is unclear or u dont agree. Tks.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1798
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 28 Mar 2004, 08:52
Hi Ashwyn

I will give it to you. I guess D has a flaw in itself.
More importantly the author is giving evidence. I believe E makes more sense. I just thought properties of birds cannot be called the phenomenon.

Anand.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Posts: 155
Location: New York
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 28 Mar 2004, 09:45
I like the explanations you guys gave, but I think I'd go with B on this one, if I saw this Q on the exam. My reasoning:

If the author states that the Din. are not closely related to Reptiles, he must show why previous claims were made about the similarity of Din and Reptiles. Also, one might question the evolution of present day reptiles, what were they like back during the times of evolution. Similarly, while the author demonstrates with examples that D had many characteristics of birds and other warm blooded animals, I am still not sure what the previous claims were based on. Maybe Din breath like birds, have hollow bones and so on, but they are still more closely related to Reptiles. E is most definitely a convincing statement, but I still believe that the author establishes a principle--dinosaurs cant be resmble reptiles-b/c they have many carachteristics of warm blooded animals, which is not true Din can still belong to the reptile family. Cat's breath thru mouth, and do many other things like dogs, yet they dont belong to the canine family. Anyway, thats my take on it. Feel free to correct any flaws in my reasoninig.

Needed a little editing. This question is really tough in my opinion, and I REALLY dont like the "general principle" phrase, unless we can assume that the first statement can be called a general principle, which is what I did. :)
_________________

---------------------------------------------------
The more I learn, the more I realize I know nothing!
----------------------------------------------------

GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4318
Followers: 23

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 28 Mar 2004, 10:21
lvb9th wrote:
but I still believe that the author establishes a principle--dinosaurs cant be resmble reptiles-b/c they have many carachteristics of warm blooded animals

Is this really what you call a principle or is it just a mere claim the author is trying to prove?
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Posts: 155
Location: New York
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 28 Mar 2004, 10:51
Paul wrote:
lvb9th wrote:
but I still believe that the author establishes a principle--dinosaurs cant be resmble reptiles-b/c they have many carachteristics of warm blooded animals

Is this really what you call a principle or is it just a mere claim the author is trying to prove?


Paul,

I agree with E, but I am still not sure why B is wrong, if it is. Yes, I was a little hesistant to call it a principle. Id like to see the official explanation. The core of my reasoning was that, while it is possible that Din resemble Birds, we still dont know, but it is possible that Din have greater similarity with Reptiles. If that is a phenomenon, then I would agree with E. But using the same reasoning, we could call a hundred of accepted principles a phenomenon. There are many birds that can't fly, but we still classify them as birds, is that a phenomenon? Hmm, maybe I am taking it too far, or even in the wrong direction. :roll:
_________________

---------------------------------------------------
The more I learn, the more I realize I know nothing!
----------------------------------------------------

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Jul 2003
Posts: 656
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 28 Mar 2004, 16:17
official answer is E

Sorry, there is no official explanation.
  [#permalink] 28 Mar 2004, 16:17
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the gurpreet07 6 11 Feb 2009, 20:53
Fossils found recently in Pakistan provide evidence lucyqin 5 26 May 2008, 21:51
Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the bhatiagp 6 29 Apr 2008, 03:17
Fossils found recently in Pakistan provide evidence kumarajeet06 7 20 Mar 2007, 16:04
Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the jyotsnasarabu 11 03 Dec 2006, 08:35
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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®.