Summer is Coming! Join the Game of Timers Competition to Win Epic Prizes. Registration is Open. Game starts Mon July 1st.

It is currently 20 Jul 2019, 01:03

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

Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 10 Sep 2015
Posts: 74
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Human Resources
GMAT 1: 640 Q47 V31
GMAT 2: 660 Q47 V35
GMAT 3: 700 Q49 V36
GPA: 4
Reviews Badge
Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Oct 2017, 14:18
9
23
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

35% (02:34) correct 65% (02:49) wrong based on 643 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics


Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence for the mastery of fire in Tanzania, from a period slightly after the time that Homo habilis was present in Africa. These sites clearly were founded by Homo erectus, the descendent species of Homo habilis that migrated north, out of Africa and into Asia. Homo erectus was known to have mastered fire, from ample evidence at sites in Asia. There is no reason to attribute mastery of fire to Homo ergaster, the descendent species of Homo habilis that remained in Africa.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?


(A) Before their migration, Homo erectus occupied African territory as far south as Tanzania.

(B) The strain of migration provided the selective pressure motivating Homo erectus‘ mastery of fire.

(C) Homo ergaster would not have derived as much benefit from the mastery of fire as did Homo erectus.

(D) Homo ergaster inherited all cultural knowledge from Homo habilis, a species that did not have mastery of fire.

(E) Homo ergaster did not occupy regions as far south as Tanzania until well after the time of these three sites.
Most Helpful Community Reply
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 01 Jun 2016
Posts: 27
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Oct 2017, 16:47
5
pra1785 wrote:
Can someone explain why E is wrong and A is right ?


Even I chose E but it is indeed a wrong answer. Let's try negation on A and E.

E says: Homo ergaster did not occupy regions as far south as Tanzania until well after the time of these three sites.
After negation
Homo ergaster did occupy regions as far south as Tanzania until well after the time of these three sites.

the argument does not fall apart. Now, let's try A

Before their migration, Homo erectus occupied African territory as far south as Tanzania.
After negation
Before their migration, Homo erectus not occupied African territory as far south as Tanzania.
Argument false apart as if they are not there in that territory how can we attribute the mastery of fire to them.

So, answer is A
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 21 Sep 2015
Posts: 47
Reviews Badge
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Oct 2017, 13:51
3
1
Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence for the mastery of fire in Tanzania, from a period slightly after the time that Homo habilis was present in Africa. These sites clearly were founded by Homo erectus, the descendent species of Homo habilis that migrated north, out of Africa and into Asia. Homo erectus was known to have mastered fire, from ample evidence at sites in Asia. There is no reason to attribute mastery of fire to Homo ergaster, the descendent species of Homo habilis that remained in Africa.

First and foremost, there's a KEY item of reference that this question ASSUMES (I know, ironic) that people know: Tanzania is in Africa. I thought Tanzania was some sub-continent back when Pangaea was created and that IT WAS IN ASIA. Note the "from a period ..." describes the period NOT the location of Tanzania. After you get this..it's not that hard. Let's draw a treasure map.

------------------
ASIA
------------------
|
| Migration Path
|
-----------------
The Great Africa
[~~~~~~]
[ * * * ] - Tanzania (* * * = fire)
[~~~~~~]


-----------------

Now, let's boil down the argument!

*Evidence of fire found in Tanzania after Homo habilis was found there.
*Homo erectus (derived from Homo habilis) at some later time moved north and knew FIRE from evidence in ASIA (although we don't know when they learnt it)
*Homo egaster/eGANGSTAs (derived from Homo habilis) stayed in Africa.

Claim: The evidence of fire must be from Homo erectus and not the Homo eGangstas. Note this is a 2 part claim.


This claim sort of makes absolutely no sense. We'd need a lot of assumptions.

1) Homo erectus were in the area (before or after migration) AND Homo eGangstas were not in the area.

OR

2) Homo erectus were in the area (before or after migration) AND Homo eGangstas didn't know how to cook (Mastery of Fire)



Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) Before their migration, Homo erectus occupied African territory as far south as Tanzania.
Part of Assumption 1)
(B) The strain of migration provided the selective pressure motivating Homo erectus‘ mastery of fire.
-Out of scope, we don't care about the cause for Mastery of Fire.
(C) Homo ergaster would not have derived as much benefit from the mastery of fire as did Homo erectus.
-Out of scope, we don't care about the benefits of Mastery of Fire.
(D) Homo ergaster inherited all cultural knowledge from Homo habilis, a species that did not have mastery of fire.
-Homo ergaster can still discover fire on their own.
(E) Homo ergaster did not occupy regions as far south as Tanzania until well after the time of these three sites

Let's negate! The "until" statement is a bit tricky here, here's an analogy:

Statement: You can not buy the car until you have enough money.
NEGATION: You can buy the car even if you don't have enough money.

Now the actual NEGATION: Homo eGANGSTAs did occupy regions well before the time of these three sites.
This fits the second part of (1)


In my opinion, A and E are both correct and not COMPLETE.

_________________
Insanity at its finest.
General Discussion
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 20 Jan 2016
Posts: 179
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Oct 2017, 10:09
Can someone explain why E is wrong and A is right ?
SVP
SVP
avatar
P
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1524
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jan 2018, 06:11
According to the official solution, B and E are strengtheners.

experts, Pls help me, what is the conclusion of the argument? It is because there is no key transition word.
"These sites clearly were founded by Homo erectus," -> how can A be the assumption if the information in A has been mentioned?
Furthermore, I am not sure how Homo erectus is related to the conclusion that "no reason to attribute mastery of fire to Homo ergaster". How?
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 30 Dec 2016
Posts: 234
GMAT 1: 650 Q42 V37
GPA: 4
WE: Business Development (Other)
Reviews Badge
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jan 2018, 12:47
2
Here is the OE from Magoosh.

Remains of prehistoric fire were found in Tanzania. The author says that Homo erectus made these fires, and that there’s no reason to assume Homo ergaster did. What is a necessary assumption?

The credited answer is choice (A). Homo erectus had to be as far south as Tanzania — if they were not, there would be no way they could have made those fires there, which would seem to indicate that Homo ergaster made them after all. Negating this statement devastates the argument, which is a confirmation that we have an assumption.

Whatever might have caused Homo erectus to master fire doesn’t clarify who made those fires in Tanzania: Homo erectus or Homo ergaster? Choice (B) is not correct.

Suppose Homo ergaster would have derived as much benefit from the master of fire as did the Homo erectus, or even more benefit. That fact, by itself, would imply nothing about which one of these species created those fires in Tanzania. Denying this doesn’t change the validity of the argument. Choice (C) is not correct.

Choice (D) is intriguing, because it may be true. Both Homo erectus and Homo ergaster evolved from Homo habilis, so it’s quite likely that the Homo habilis was the sole source of cultural knowledge for either of these species. BUT, we know that Homo erectus, presumably without the benefit of cultural knowledge about fire, was able to master fire. If Homo erectus did that, why couldn’t Homo ergaster? In other words, the limits of the cultural knowledge inherited does not necessarily set limits on what these human species could achieve. Therefore, we can draw no conclusion with respect to this argument. Choice (D) is not correct.

If Choice (E) were true, it would support the argument, but a supporting statement is not necessarily an assumption. We have to use the Negation Test. Suppose Homo ergaster was all over in Tanzania, before & during & after the time that those fires were created. Would that prove Homo ergaster started those fires? Not necessarily. It could still be true that both Homo ergaster and Homo erectus occupied that region, that only the latter had mastered fire, and therefore, that the later had to start those fires in Tanzania. Thus, we can deny choice and it doesn’t necessarily contradict the argument. Therefore, it is not an assumption. Choice (E) is not correct.
_________________
Regards
SandySilva


____________
Please appreciate the efforts by pressing +1 KUDOS (:
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 29 Nov 2016
Posts: 140
CAT Tests
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jan 2019, 23:55
chesstitans wrote:
According to the official solution, B and E are strengtheners.

experts, Pls help me, what is the conclusion of the argument? It is because there is no key transition word.
"These sites clearly were founded by Homo erectus," -> how can A be the assumption if the information in A has been mentioned?
Furthermore, I am not sure how Homo erectus is related to the conclusion that "no reason to attribute mastery of fire to Homo ergaster". How?


I agree. I didn't mark A as this was specified in argument that these sites were founded by Homo Erectus. If they were founded then they must have been occupied before migration of HE.

I understand that the point is if they were masters of fire or not at the time they founded the sites or before migration to asia. (The word immediately before migration) would still have made A correct. In its current state A looks essentially the same as info mentioned in argument.

generis I would appreciate your expert comment.

Posted from my mobile device
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 21 Jan 2019
Posts: 1
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Feb 2019, 21:16
The answer A says, Homo erectus occupied territory as far south as Tanzania. But is it not a fact given in the question. Further to it the argument states Homo erectus moved towards north out of africa and into asia. Is this not evidence enough to prove homo erectus stayed in south as well. In fact A) has completely destroyed the crux of the passage itself. But argument says it needs a reason to show Homo ergaster could not be attributed to this. Now there is a reason from E) to believe homo ergaster attribution to fire.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 11 Feb 2018
Posts: 280
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V37
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V36
GMAT 3: 750 Q50 V42
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Feb 2019, 05:58
When homo ergaster occupied the sites is irrelevant.We have to look a little closely to put this option under out of scope.

Neverthless a great question from an unofficial source..

Posted from my mobile device
Target Test Prep Representative
User avatar
P
Status: Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Posts: 556
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Feb 2019, 08:04
rkkrengarajan wrote:
The answer A says, Homo erectus occupied territory as far south as Tanzania. But is it not a fact given in the question.

The passage does not clearly differentiate between facts and subconclusions. So, it does seem to present as fact that Homo erectus occupied the sites mentioned, and at the same time could be interpreted as indicating that they did only as a subconclusion.

Quote:
Further to it the argument states Homo erectus moved towards north out of africa and into asia. Is this not evidence enough to prove homo erectus stayed in south as well. In fact A) has completely destroyed the crux of the passage itself. But argument says it needs a reason to show Homo ergaster could not be attributed to this. Now there is a reason from E) to believe homo ergaster attribution to fire.
Your reasoning makes complete sense. The funny thing is that if you take as fact that Homo erectus occupied the sites, then maybe (E) is not an assumption upon which the argument depends, but of course, then (A) is not either.
_________________

Marty Murray

Chief Curriculum and Content Architect

Marty@targettestprep.com
TTP - Target Test Prep Logo
122 Reviews

5-star rated online GMAT quant
self study course

See why Target Test Prep is the top rated GMAT quant course on GMAT Club. Read Our Reviews

If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "Kudos" button.

Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 14 Feb 2017
Posts: 722
Location: Australia
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 560 Q41 V26
GMAT 2: 550 Q43 V23
GMAT 3: 650 Q47 V33
GPA: 2.61
WE: Management Consulting (Consulting)
CAT Tests
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Jul 2019, 18:57
Reviewing my EL - I understand where I went wrong.

I chose E incorrectly. The key is understanding the link between the evidence for me.

The argument is that we have no reason to attribute fire mastery to Ergaster since the evidence we have suggests that Erectus mastered the fire.
What evidence do we have to suggest this?
- Erectus founded the sites - so they were at the sites before other Ergaster
- Areas in Asia, where Erectus migrated, were found to contain similar sites
- Erectus migrated into Asia

Why E is incorrect - Even if Ergaster did occupy areas in Tanzania after the three sites the evidence is that Erectus was there at the sites first.
Negated: Ergaster occupied regions in Tanzania after the time of these three sites.
--> Negated statement actually strengthens the conclusion

A is the link between the evidence in Asia and the conclusion

A must be true for our conclusion and deduction to be correct.

If Erectus didn't occupy Tanzania, then we can't attribute these Asian sites, which led the archeologists to conclude that mastery of fire was learned, to Erectus, and therefore we cannot deduce that Ergaster did not potentially get to the Tanzanian sites first.
_________________
Goal: Q49, V41

+1 Kudos if you like my post pls!
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence   [#permalink] 01 Jul 2019, 18:57
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Archeologists have discovered three sites showing conclusive evidence

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





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