Although most anthropologists believe humans first arrived in New Zeal

Question

Although most anthropologists believe humans first arrived in New Zealand in the late thirteenth century, others have dated the arrival to much earlier—around 200 BC. The earlier arrival date was based on 1996 research that carbon-dated bones of rats, which are thought to have been brought to New Zealand by humans. With no evidence of human settlements that early, critics suggested that the carbon dates were due to lab errors in preparing the bones.

Now, a team led by Janet Wilmshurst has applied an improved preparation technique to other rat bones collected from excavation sites where the oldest New Zealand rat remains were found. The new rat-bone dates are all more recent than AD 1280. The Wilmshurst team’s carbon dating of bones from the previous study indicated that these, too, were more recent than AD 1280. They also carbon-dated seeds from the oldest rat-bone sites. Some of the seeds were nearly four thousand years old, but none of those with distinctive rat-gnaw marks was older than about AD 1290.

Wilmshurst’s findings provide convincing evidence that neither rats nor people reached New Zealand before the thirteenth century AD. So the devastating ecological impact of humans on New Zealand, such as deforestation and the extinction of animal species (the rats themselves wiped out several species, including some birds and frogs), took only about six hundred years, rather than over two thousand years.

1. The passage most strongly suggests that which of the following statements is true of the critics mentioned in the first paragraph (see highlighting)?

A. Their skepticism regarding the 200-BC carbon dating of the rat bones was based on the results of the research project that is described in the second paragraph.

B. Their position regarding the 200-BC carbon dating of the rat bones was motivated by the fact that the 1996 research did not date any rat-gnawed seeds from the excavation sites.

C. They questioned the assumption that rats first arrived in New Zealand at the same time as humans.

D. They were skeptical of the claim that humans’ importation of rats had a devastating impact on New Zealand’s ecosystems.

E. Their belief that humans first arrived in New Zealand much later than 200 BC did not depend on any of the carbon-dating of rat-bones mentioned in the passage.

2. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. describe how some research has attempted to answer a long-standing question that was not addressed by similar previous research
B. describe the evidence that some research has provided against a purported finding of some previous research
C. demonstrate that a popular opinion regarding a particular issue has been based on faulty research
D. compare and contrast two research methods aimed at solving a particular problem
E. examine the implications that a certain body of research is likely to have for a proposed course of action

3. The final paragraph serves primarily to

A. provide additional evidence to help support the conclusions drawn from Wilmshurst’s research
B. call for additional research to explore the implications of Wilmshurst’s research
C. illustrate how disagreements within the scientific community can affect those outside that community
D. suggest a way in which the rats’ arrival date is relevant to another issue regarding New Zealand history
E. demonstrate that the procedures used by the researchers in the 1996 study were flawed

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-qjm7tpre.png [ 121.16 KiB | Viewed 2623 times ]

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-nxhno8ly.png [ 53.18 KiB | Viewed 2620 times ]

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-6vpn6s4h.png [ 58.45 KiB | Viewed 2621 times ]

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-o0oly8ec.png [ 81.68 KiB | Viewed 2619 times ]

Show Answer Question #1

Official Answer

E

Show Answer Question #2

Official Answer

B

Show Answer Question #3

Official Answer

D

dine5207 · Answer

1. The passage most strongly suggests that which of the following statements is true of the critics mentioned in the first paragraph (see highlighting)?

A. Their skepticism regarding the 200-BC carbon dating of the rat bones was based on the results of the research project that is described in the second paragraph- Incorrect. No where in the passage it mentioned that critics were skeptical regarding the 200 BC based on the results of research project. It's true that passage mentioned about the results of research project led by Janet Wilmshurst, but it's nowhere related to critics.

B. Their position regarding the 200-BC carbon dating of the rat bones was motivated by the fact that the 1996 research did not date any rat-gnawed seeds from the excavation sites.- Incorrect. Again, Nowhere in the passage it mentioned that critics consider their position based on rat-gnawed seeds research, and that research was basically led by different team.

C. They questioned the assumption that rats first arrived in New Zealand at the same time as humans- Incorrect. Not mentioned anywhere in the passage.

D. They were skeptical of the claim that humans’ importation of rats had a devastating impact on New Zealand’s ecosystems- Incorrect. Rats had a devastating impact on New Zealand’s ecosystems may be by wiping out some species mentioned in the last passage, but again nowhere related to critic's response.

E. Their belief that humans first arrived in New Zealand much later than 200 BC did not depend on any of the carbon-dating of rat-bones mentioned in the passage- Correct. If you read this " With no evidence of human settlements that early, critics suggested that the carbon dates were due to lab errors in preparing the bones." carefully they considered only the human settlements and did not mention any dependency with the rat bones.

I understand the passage clearly, then this question is pretty easy to answer.

anish777 · Answer

Hello experts
Can anyone explain question 1 here ?
I understand that E is correct here as the critics' opinion was not based on any carbon-dating of the rats. However it appears to me that the critics were looking for an evidence of human settlement in the same time period, and thus they were directly hinting at the question of the timing of the rats and human arrival in the island nation. This is mentioned in C. Then how come we are eliminating C ?
Thanks

carcass · Answer

Although most anthropologists believe humans first arrived in New Zealand in the late thirteenth century, others have dated the arrival to much earlier—around 200 BC. The earlier arrival date was based on 1996 research that carbon-dated bones of rats, which are thought to have been brought to New Zealand by humans. With no evidence of human settlements that early, critics suggested that the carbon dates were due to lab errors in preparing the bones.

Now, a team led by Janet Wilmshurst has applied an improved preparation technique to other rat bones collected from excavation sites where the oldest New Zealand rat remains were found

Now, a team led by Janet Wilmshurst has applied an improved preparation technique to other rat bones collected from excavation sites where the oldest New Zealand rat remains were found

it is wise when the question suggests you infer what is about the highlighted portion of the passage, to look at some sentence before the same portion and some sentence after the same portion. I:E, the answer is around that area of interest

Now, what we do know

1) They performed a lab test to the rats' bones to assess if the came along with humans first in NZ, therefore if this was true we do know that humans settled in NZ at that specific time.
2) First we used a set of bones and then to confirm hour hypothesis we used another set of bones but still to confirm the same  thing

A. Their skepticism regarding the 200-BC carbon dating of the rat bones was based on the results of the research project that is described in the second paragraph.

This is false because we do not have a new or another research project in the second paragraph. We have the same with an improved technique. Wrong

B. Their position regarding the 200-BC carbon dating of the rat bones was motivated by the fact that the 1996 research did not date any rat-gnawed seeds from the excavation sites.

I do not know what that means (I am serious) - however what I do know is that no seeds are mentioned in the early portion of the passage

C. They questioned the assumption that rats first arrived in New Zealand at the same time as humans.

They question the lab test NOT that the rats never came to NZ

D. They were skeptical of the claim that humans’ importation of rats had a devastating impact on New Zealand’s ecosystems.

This is completely off. Just a filler. You should work on 4 answer choices when you see such options

E. Their belief that humans first arrived in New Zealand much later than 200 BC did not depend on any of the carbon-dating of rat-bones mentioned in the passage.

Correct   If we know that critics suggested that the carbon dates were due to lab errors in preparing the bones and after improving the lab test, then we do know they question any sort of testing!!

thr3at · Answer

Hello,

I didnt understood explanation of E 
can you please explain it again.

and A is not saying that it is a new project, it just says that their skepticism was based on the result of the project described in the 2nd Para ( which is correcta)

Can you please tell where my reasoning is wrong.

sayan640 · Answer

2. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. describe how some research has attempted to answer a long-standing question that was not addressed by similar previous research
B. describe the evidence that some research has provided against a purported finding of some previous research
C. demonstrate that a popular opinion regarding a particular issue has been based on faulty research
D. compare and contrast two research methods aimed at solving a particular problem
E. examine the implications that a certain body of research is likely to have for a proposed course of action

Only Option B and C are close.
Option C is wrong because of this part ,
  Although most anthropologists believe humans first arrived in New Zealand in the late thirteenth century, others have dated the arrival to much earlier—around 200 BC. The earlier arrival date was based on 1996 research that carbon-dated bones of rats, which are thought to have been brought to New Zealand by humans.

Option C is wrong because  nowhere in the passage was it mentioned that the opinion that the carbon-dated bones of rats were of earlier date was  popular. 
In fact since the most anthropologists believe humans first arrived in New Zealand in the late thirteenth century, this opinion is more popular and this opinion is NOT based on any faulty research mentioned in the passage.

Option B is right because the passage revolves around the research performed by Janet Wilmshurst and her team.

KarishmaB   MartyMurray  Kindly check my reasoning.

amangoel2023 · Answer

In question 2, why is the answer A, and not B

sayan640 · Answer

In question 2 , the answer is B .

Posted from my mobile device

KarishmaB · Answer

Question 1. 1. The passage most strongly suggests that which of the following statements is true of the critics mentioned in the first paragraph (see highlighting)? A. Their skepticism regarding the 200-BC carbon dating of the rat bones was based on the results of the research project that is described in the second paragraph. B. Their position regarding the 200-BC carbon dating of the rat bones was motivated by the fact that the 1996 research did not date any rat-gnawed seeds from the excavation sites. C. They questioned the assumption that rats first arrived in New Zealand at the same time as humans. D. They were skeptical of the claim that humans’ importation of rats had a devastating impact on New Zealand’s ecosystems. E. Their belief that humans first arrived in New Zealand much later than 200 BC did not depend on any of the carbon-dating of rat-bones mentioned in the passage. Given: Although most anthropologists believe humans first arrived in New Zealand in 13th century, others have dated the arrival to much earlier—around 200 BC. This was based on 1996 research that carbon-dated bones of rats, .. With no evidence of human settlements that early, critics suggested that the carbon dates were due to lab errors in preparing the bones. Now, a team led by... The highlighted critics said that earlier rat reseahc had errors and that humans arrive in 13th century only. Method of elimination helps us here. A. Their skepticism regarding the 200-BC carbon dating of the rat bones was based on the results of the research project that is described in the second paragraph. The critics were skeptical before too. The research in the second paragraph has taken place now. Hence this is not correct. B. Their position regarding the 200-BC carbon dating of the rat bones was motivated by the fact that the 1996 research did not date any rat-gnawed seeds from the excavation sites. There is no discussion of rat-gnawed seeds in the 1996 research. Hence no data in passage about this. C. They questioned the assumption that rats first arrived in New Zealand at the same time as humans. We are not given that they questioned this assumption. In fact it seems from the passage that everybody agrees with this assumption. These critics thought that the problem was errors in the lab. D. They were skeptical of the claim that humans’ importation of rats had a devastating impact on New Zealand’s ecosystems. We have not been given anywhere what these skeptics think of humans’ importation of rats. The skeptics were mentioned only once - in the first paragraph. E. Their belief that humans first arrived in New Zealand much later than 200 BC did not depend on any of the carbon-dating of rat-bones mentioned in the passage. Correct. The first mention of carbon-dating of rat-bones in 1996 suggested that humans arrived in 200BC. The critics believed that they arrived much later hence their belief was not based on this study. The second study mentioned in the second paragraph happened later (now). Hence the critics belief was not based on this study either. Answer (E) GMAT-Club-Forum-1jikkjxu.png GMAT-Club-Forum-m8oheqve.png GMAT-Club-Forum-1wzwaw68.png GMAT-Club-Forum-6o9d7hkh.png

KarishmaB · Answer

Question 2.

2. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. describe how some research has attempted to answer a long-standing question that was not addressed by similar previous research
B. describe the evidence that some research has provided against a purported finding of some previous research
C. demonstrate that a popular opinion regarding a particular issue has been based on faulty research
D. compare and contrast two research methods aimed at solving a particular problem
E. examine the implications that a certain body of research is likely to have for a proposed course of action

A. describe how some research has attempted to answer a long-standing question that was not addressed by similar previous research

Two researches are mentioned and both address the same issue - when did rats arrive in New Zealand (and hence when did humans arrive). Hence this option is not corerct.

B. describe the evidence that some research has provided against a purported finding of some previous research

Correct. The passage provides evidence of the new research (rats came in 13th century to NZ) which is against the finding of the 1996 research (rats were present in NZ in 200 BC)

C. demonstrate that a popular opinion regarding a particular issue has been based on faulty research

It is not correct to call humans arriving in 200 BC popular opinion. As per the passage, that opinion was based on faulty research.
We are given that most anthropologists believe humans first arrived in New Zealand in the late 13th century. Hence this is the popular opinion.

D. compare and contrast two research methods aimed at solving a particular problem

Both studies used the same methods - carbon dating bones of rats.

E. examine the implications that a certain body of research is likely to have for a proposed course of action

There is no discussion on any proposed course of action.

Answer (B)

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-4y9g3yz1.png

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-ewfrst0c.png

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-00xixdhg.png

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-vkrp7pip.png

KarishmaB · Answer

Question 3. 3. The final paragraph serves primarily to A. provide additional evidence to help support the conclusions drawn from Wilmshurst’s research B. call for additional research to explore the implications of Wilmshurst’s research C. illustrate how disagreements within the scientific community can affect those outside that community D. suggest a way in which the rats’ arrival date is relevant to another issue regarding New Zealand history E. demonstrate that the procedures used by the researchers in the 1996 study were flawed Given: Wilmshurst’s findings provide convincing evidence that neither rats nor people reached New Zealand before the 13th century AD. So the devastating ecological impact of humans on New Zealand ... took only about six hundred years, rather than over two thousand years. It suggests how the rats’ arrival date is relevant to the time taken to cause devastating ecological impact of humans on New Zealand. Hence (D) is correct. Answer (D) GMAT-Club-Forum-lb0odngx.png GMAT-Club-Forum-trvo5atr.png GMAT-Club-Forum-mpu6d7wr.png GMAT-Club-Forum-iomnbdgl.png

HarshZsssh · Answer

need bit more explanation for d GMAT-Club-Forum-a9fyjqkb.png GMAT-Club-Forum-s55a3kqj.png GMAT-Club-Forum-p0s8pp66.png GMAT-Club-Forum-ogpm0f86.png

egmat · Answer

Hey  HarshZsssh

I can see you're working through this RC passage function question - these can be tricky because they require you to step back and think about  why  the author included certain information rather than just  what  the information says.

Let's think about this step-by-step:

Step 1: Notice the passage structure 
The passage follows a clear progression:
- Paragraph 1: Introduces a debate (when did humans arrive in New Zealand?)
- Paragraph 2: Presents new research that resolves the debate
- Paragraph 3: Shows the implications of this resolution

Step 2: Focus on that transition word "So" 
The final paragraph starts with "So the devastating ecological impact..." - this is your biggest clue! When you see "So" beginning a paragraph, the author is typically moving from evidence to implications. They're saying "now that we've established X, here's what it means for Y."

Step 3: Identify what new issue is being introduced 
Notice how the paragraph shifts from discussing  when  rats/humans arrived to discussing  how quickly  ecological damage occurred. The author is connecting the arrival date (the resolved debate) to a different historical issue - the timeline of environmental destruction in New Zealand.

Here's what you need to see:  The final paragraph isn't providing more evidence for Wilmshurst's research (that was already done in paragraph 2). Instead, it's showing why getting the arrival date right matters - it changes our understanding of how rapidly humans impacted New Zealand's ecology (600 years vs. 2000+ years).

This makes  Choice D  correct: "suggest a way in which the rats' arrival date is relevant to another issue regarding New Zealand history." The paragraph explicitly connects the arrival date to understanding the timeline of ecological damage - a separate but related historical issue.

Choice A is tempting because the paragraph does mention deforestation and species extinction, but these aren't  evidence  supporting Wilmshurst's dating research - they're examples of known ecological impacts whose timeline is now better understood.

You can check out the  step-by-step solution on Neuron by e-GMAT  to master the systematic approach for identifying paragraph functions in RC passages. You'll learn the specific patterns that help you quickly recognize when authors shift from evidence to implications, and how to avoid common trap answers. You can also explore other GMAT official RC questions with detailed solutions on Neuron for structured practice  here .

nandini14 · Answer

I still do not understand why answer b is the right choice, I had picked C

egmat · Answer

nandini14

I can see why  C  might seem tempting—the passage does discuss Wilmshurst's research overturning the  1996  findings, which could feel like exposing "faulty research."

The Critical Distinction: Popular vs. Minority Opinion

The key issue is what constitutes a "popular opinion." Look at the first sentence:

"Although  most anthropologists believe  humans first arrived in New Zealand in the late thirteenth century,  others  have dated the arrival to much earlier—around  200  BC."

The word  "most"  tells us the  13th  century view is the popular opinion, while the  200  BC date is a minority claim by "others."

Choice C  says the passage demonstrates a "popular opinion" was based on faulty research—but the  200  BC date which was actually based on "faulty research" was never popular. It was always a minority view. 
  Choice B  correctly identifies this as a "purported finding" (a claim made by some researchers) rather than popular opinion. The passage describes how Wilmshurst's research provided evidence  against  this minority claim from  1996 .

What Went Wrong in Your Thinking

The trap in  C  is that it focuses on the dramatic element (debunking faulty research), which is emotionally compelling. But primary purpose questions require  structural analysis —what is the passage actually doing? It's presenting new research that contradicts previous research, not debunking mainstream belief.

In this passage: Majority =  13th  century arrival, Wilmshurst supports majority → Answer should reference "evidence against a finding" ( Choice B ), not "debunking popular opinion."

I hope this makes it more clear for you? If you still have any follow-up questions, let me know!

Although most anthropologists believe humans first arrived in New Zeal

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

Although most anthropologists believe humans first arrived in New Zeal

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards