I got asked to take this one on by private message, so here I am! This one has me a bit confused. I don't see how the OA can be C. Where is this question from?
Responding to the public’s fascination with-and sometimes undue alarm over-possible threats from asteroids, a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may collide with Earth.
A. a scale developed by astronomers rates the likelihood that a particular asteroid or comet may
PROBLEM: "Responding to..." is a participial phrase modifying a noun, so the noun has to come right after the comma. The astronomers responded, not the scale.
B. a scale that astronomers have developed rates how likely it is for a particular asteroid or comet to
PROBLEM: Same as above.
C. astronomers have developed a scale to rate how likely a particular asteroid or comet will be to
PROBLEM: You can't say "likely...will be to". It's gibberish. Your ear would recognize that if there weren't all those words in between, confusing things. Try a short example. You should always be able to replace "likely" with "probably".
My program determines how likely you will be to love me.
My program determines how probably you will be to love me...MAKES NO SENSE!
E. astronomers have developed a scale that rates the likelihood of a particular asteroid or comet that may
PROBLEM: You can't have a likelihood of something that may happen. It's the likelihood that something WILL happen.
Hi Tommy ,you said that one should always be able to replace likely with probably.
But if you consider the following sentence ,the above does not hold true
He is likely to win the contest
He is probably to win the contest
Also you said
PROBLEM: You can't have a likelihood of something
that may happen. It's the likelihood that something WILL happen.
But if you consider the following sentence you will find a few examples where the above does not hold true.http://www.yourdictionary.com/examples/likelihood
Do search results lead to a likelihood of
The report notes that recent research has found that programs for offenders with drinking problems can reduce the likelihood of re-offending
The likelihood of this happening
outside three kilometer protection zones is very low.
The output of the risk analysis is an assessment of the likelihood of occurrence
for each possible outcome.
Please explain .This is getting murkier
My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !
Please let me know your opinion about the Chandigarh Gmat Centrehttp://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-experience-at-chandigarh-india-centre-111830.html