Archaeologist: A skeleton of a North American mastodon that became ext

Question

Archaeologist: A skeleton of a North American mastodon that became extinct at the peak of the Ice Age was recently discovered. It contains a human-made projectile dissimilar to any found in that part of Eurasia closest to North America.Thus, since Eurasians did not settle in North America until shortly before the peak of the Ice Age, the first Eurasian settlers in North America probably came from a more distant part of Eurasia.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the archaeologist’s argument?

(A) The projectile found in the mastodon does not resemble any that were used in Eurasia before or during the Ice Age.

(B) The people who occupied the Eurasian area closest to North America remained nomadic throughout the Ice Age.

(C) The skeleton of a bear from the same place and time as the mastodon skeleton contains a similar projectile.

(D) Other North American artifacts from the peak of the Ice Age are similar to ones from the same time found in more distant parts of Eurasia.

(E) Climatic conditions in North America just before the Ice Age were more conducive to human habitation than were those in the part of Eurasia closest to North America at that time

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The stimulus sets up an interesting argument that appears fairly reasonable. A mastodon skeleton has been found containing a human-made projectile dissimilar to those of the part of Eurasia closest to North America and because Eurasians did not settle in North America until shortly before the peak of the Ice Age, the first Eurasian settlers of North America probably came from a more distant part of Eurasia than the area nearest North America. To make a very rough analogy using dialects, it is like a resident of Washington, D.C. saying, “The visitors we just met did not sound like they were from Virginia, so they must be from a much more distant part of the U.S.” Reading that rough analogy, you can see that the speaker has assumed that the visitors are from the U.S. Of course, that does not have to be the case—they could be from England or France or elsewhere. The same form of assumption has occurred in the argument, and the author has assumed that the projectile is of Eurasian origin.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer.  This answer hurts the argument by indicating that the projectile is apparently not Eurasian, suggesting that the first Eurasian settlers could have come from any part of Eurasia, including the area closest to North America.

Answer choice (B): This is the most attractive wrong answer, but regardless, this answer does not hurt the argument. Some students attempt to conclude that since the people were nomadic, they could have moved to areas farther away and found projectiles like the one in the mastodon. However, even though these individuals remained nomadic, they were apparently nomadic within the area of Eurasia closest to North America because the answer clearly states, “The people who occupied the Eurasia area closest to North America...” Hence, they did not necessarily occupy other areas and this answer does not hurt the argument.

Answer choice (C): This Opposite answer supports the argument by showing that the projectile in the mastodon was not a one-time, anomalous occurrence. If other, similar projectiles come to light, then the author’s position would be strengthened.

Answer choice (D): This Opposite answer supports the argument by connecting other artifacts of the same age as the projectile to parts of Eurasia more distant than the area of Eurasia closest to North America. This adds further evidence to the idea that the first Eurasian settlers of North America probably came from a more distant part of Eurasia than the area nearest North America.

Answer choice (E): This Opposite answer supports the argument by indicating that the part of Eurasia closest to North America may not have been inhabited just before the Ice Age. If this area was uninhabitable, then it is more likely that settlers coming to North America came from more distant regions.

Nevernevergiveup · Answer

Archaeologist: 
A skeleton of a North American mastodon that became extinct at the peak of the Ice Age was recently discovered. 
It contains a human-made projectile dissimilar  or it is not similar to  any found in that part of Eurasia closest to North America.
Eurasians did not settle in North America until shortly before the peak of the Ice Age,
Thus, the first Eurasian settlers in North America probably came from a more distant part of Eurasia.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the archaeologist’s argument?
(A) The projectile found in the mastodon does not resemble any that were used in Eurasia before or during the Ice Age........... so he cannot be part of neither near or farther part of Eurasia. Thus conclusion weakens a bit.

(B) The people who occupied the Eurasian area closest to North America remained nomadic throughout the Ice Age............ even if the people are nomadic in nature, they can move both from farther part of Eurasia to nearer part or vice-versa before moving to North America. This statement neither supports nor weakens the conclusion.

(C) The skeleton of a bear from the same place and time as the mastodon skeleton contains a similar projectile .......OPPOSITE....Supports if not anything else

(D) Other North American artifacts from the peak of the Ice Age are similar to ones from the same time found in more distant parts of Eurasia........... .......OPPOSITE....Supports if not anything else

(E) Climatic conditions in North America just before the Ice Age were more conducive to human habitation than were those in the part of Eurasia closest to North America at that time.......... This speaks about climatic conditions in North Americs vs Eurasia at the time of Ice age which is totally Irrelevant.

souvik101990 · Answer

The conclusion is that the first Eurasian settlers in NA came from a more distant part of Eurasia - the premises are that The projectiles found in the Mastadon were dissimilar to any from Eurasia closest to NA and the Eurasians did not settle until shortly before the Mastadon died.

In order to weaken the argument you need an answer that woudl show that the settlers didn't come from a more distant part of Eurasia eventhough these projectiles were dissimilar to those from near Eurasia.

A - weakens becuase it shows that the projectile isn't similar to any tribes - which means it can't be used to identify the settlers and thus, becuase it is the main support for the argument, the argument is weakened.

aaba · Answer

I manage to cross out B,D, and E.
Both A and C are common patterns. I fail to notice that in C " a bear from the same place " actually helps to strengthen the argument.
The argument pattern and structure and content can be found in many similar questions, but the writing of this question is hard to understand.

unraveled · Answer

Archaeologist: A skeleton of a North American mastodon that became extinct at the peak of the Ice Age was recently discovered. It contains a human-made projectile dissimilar to any found in that part of Eurasia closest to North America.Thus, since Eurasians did not settle in North America until shortly before the peak of the Ice Age, the first Eurasian settlers in North America probably came from a more distant part of Eurasia.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the archaeologist’s argument?

(A) The projectile found in the mastodon  does not resemble  any that were  used  in Eurasia  before or during the Ice Age . - CORRECT. Proves that projectile might have been from distant part.

(B) The people who occupied the Eurasian area closest to North America  remained nomadic throughout the Ice Age . - WRONG. Okay, if they remained so then how do it elaborates that projectile came from distant part.

(C) The skeleton of a bear from the same place and time as the mastodon skeleton contains a similar projectile. - WRONG. Does not help. Again question remains intact.

(D) Other North American artifacts from the peak of the Ice Age are similar to ones from the same time found in more distant parts of Eurasia. - WRONG. Like C it is also doing nothing. Mostly irrelevant.

(E) Climatic conditions in North America just before the Ice Age were more conducive to human habitation than were those in the part of Eurasia closest to North America at that time - WRONG. Does that mean it was also more conducive than distant part of Eurasia. No!!

Answer A.

kshitijapatel97 · Answer

For option E, I interpreted it as "as the climatic conditions weren't favorable, it must have forced people to move to the nearby N.America." Thus making the Eurasian settlers in N.America come from nearby locations. Why is this reasoning wrong?
Also, the conclusion says "the first 'Eurasian' settlers in North America probably came from a more distant part of Eurasia." So we are talking about Eurasian settlers and not any other ones. So shouldn't they have to come from Eurasia, making answer A not a weakener but a destroyer?

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

Archaeologist: A skeleton of a North American mastodon that became ext

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 Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Archaeologist: A skeleton of a North American mastodon that became ext

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