It is currently 23 Oct 2017, 19:50

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking

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

Hide Tags

Top Contributor
1 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
User avatar
P
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4288

Kudos [?]: 7934 [1], given: 364

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2017, 13:38
1
This post received
KUDOS
Top Contributor
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

40% (01:18) correct 60% (01:37) wrong based on 161 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and releasing 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live much longer on this planet.

A) if it were not for the bolide striking the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and releasing 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live
B) if it were not for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour, releasing 2 million times more energy than the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived
C) had it not been for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy than that of the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived
D) had it not been for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy than that of the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live
E) had the bolide not struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived

Sourced from RSSing.com - No OA Nor OE available. - open to a wide discussion and consensus. The deferred OA is not the official one
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509


Last edited by daagh on 22 Aug 2017, 23:04, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 7934 [1], given: 364

2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 26 Jun 2017
Posts: 104

Kudos [?]: 27 [2], given: 178

Location: Russian Federation
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
WE: Information Technology (Other)
Re: According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2017, 17:22
2
This post received
KUDOS
daagh wrote:
According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and releasing 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live much longer on this planet.

A) if it were not for the bolide striking the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and releasing 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live
B) if it were not for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour, releasing 2 million times more energy than the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived
C) had it not been for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy than that of the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived
D) had it not been for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy than that of the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live
E) had the bolide not struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived

Sourced from RSSing.com - No OA Nor OE available. - open to a wide discussion and consensus. The deferred OA is not the official one


I am not that confident yet, when the answer is not provided, but will try =)

B, D are out, because the conditional is not used right.
B - we have 2nd form in the begining and 3rd form in the end.
D - we have 3rd for, in the begining ans 2nd form in the end.
A - I do not like:
A1. that More comes without Than and with Compare.
A2. how the word Compared is used.
A3. that it is 2nd conditional sentence, not the 3rd one.
So out.
Now I have a dilemma with C and E.
In C I do not like this part: had it not been for the bolide that struck the Earth.
But the second part is the best (IMO): 2 million times more energy than that of the most powerful nuclear bomb - the most clear comparison of all options.
In E on the other hand I like "the normal first part": had the bolide not struck the Earth.
But do not like the comparison at all.
In E this comparison is constructed in such way, that we compare maybe not the bolide with bomb, but the energy with the bomb - that is wrong.
If we take a look back at option A, we can see, that a comparison (maybe) can be justifiedin some way. (I don't like in each way, but in this manner A is even better than E).
bolide striking the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and releasing 2 million times more energy (striking and releasing modify bolide, so we compare bolide with the bomb).

So my choice is C.

Kudos [?]: 27 [2], given: 178

Top Contributor
2 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
User avatar
P
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4288

Kudos [?]: 7934 [2], given: 364

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Aug 2017, 23:40
2
This post received
KUDOS
Top Contributor
According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and releasing 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live much longer on this planet.

Point No1: The OA has been inadvertently typed as A; In fact, it is C as DharLog has diagnosed, but my reasons are the slightly different.

My take is that in comparison questions, one must be cautious about what are being compared on either side of the comparison marker. Here the comparison marker is either compared to or more energy than. Therefore, we must ensure that if energy is one side, energy is there on the other side too. Alternatively, if the bolide is on one side, then bomb must be on the other side and not the energy. With this format in mind,


A) if it were not for the bolide striking the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and releasing 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live -- the comparison seems to be between the energy with the bomb, which is wrong.


B) if it were not for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour, releasing 2 million times more energy than the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived --- same problem as in A; In addition, there is a mix up in the use of conditionals as Dear has pointed out.


C) had it not been for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy than that of the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived --- Had it not been is the correct third conditional with the use of the past perfect in the conditional clause and would have in the main clause. This is actually the inverted conditional3. In addition, the comparison is now between energy and the energy of the bomb, rather than the bomb itself.

D) had it not been for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy than that of the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live --- The main clause belongs to conditional 2 rather than conditional 3.


E) had the bolide not struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived -- The same old mistake of comparing energy with the bomb.

Therefore, C is the best.
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Kudos [?]: 7934 [2], given: 364

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 23 Aug 2015
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 451

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Human Resources
GMAT 1: 610 Q46 V29
GPA: 3
WE: Consulting (Human Resources)
Re: According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Sep 2017, 10:17
daagh wrote:
According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and releasing 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live much longer on this planet.

Point No1: The OA has been inadvertently typed as A; In fact, it is C as DharLog has diagnosed, but my reasons are the slightly different.

My take is that in comparison questions, one must be cautious about what are being compared on either side of the comparison marker. Here the comparison marker is either compared to or more energy than. Therefore, we must ensure that if energy is one side, energy is there on the other side too. Alternatively, if the bolide is on one side, then bomb must be on the other side and not the energy. With this format in mind,


A) if it were not for the bolide striking the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and releasing 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live -- the comparison seems to be between the energy with the bomb, which is wrong.


B) if it were not for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour, releasing 2 million times more energy than the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived --- same problem as in A; In addition, there is a mix up in the use of conditionals as Dear has pointed out.


C) had it not been for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy than that of the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived --- Had it not been is the correct third conditional with the use of the past perfect in the conditional clause and would have in the main clause. This is actually the inverted conditional3. In addition, the comparison is now between energy and the energy of the bomb, rather than the bomb itself.

D) had it not been for the bolide that struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy than that of the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would live --- The main clause belongs to conditional 2 rather than conditional 3.


E) had the bolide not struck the Earth at 40,000 miles per hour and released 2 million times more energy compared to the most powerful nuclear bomb ever detonated, the dinosaurs would have lived -- The same old mistake of comparing energy with the bomb.

Therefore, C is the best.


Hi Daagh,
Can you please elaborate on the conditionals mentioned? What is the rule?

TIA.

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 451

Re: According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking   [#permalink] 07 Sep 2017, 10:17
Display posts from previous: Sort by

According to paleontologists, if it were not for the bolide striking

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


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

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.