It is currently 21 Nov 2017, 19:14

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

Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its

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

Hide Tags

4 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Oct 2011
Posts: 45

Kudos [?]: 117 [4], given: 16

Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Nov 2011, 21:07
4
This post received
KUDOS
11
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  75% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (01:29) correct 44% (01:30) wrong based on 654 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.

In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.

(B) The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

(C) The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.

(D) The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that conclusion.

(E) The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion

Similar question from GMATPrep: LINK
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 117 [4], given: 16

3 KUDOS received
BSchool Forum Moderator
avatar
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 888

Kudos [?]: 735 [3], given: 44

Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Nov 2011, 21:02
3
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The second boldface is definitely is the conclusion of the argument based on the indicator " it is likely that " ( also you have to see the logical flow of the argument). Remain E and B. In choice B, the first boldface is not "against" the conclusion (2nd boldface). So, eliminate B. See E is the correct one. The first is likely the background or evidence when astronomer investigate in the features of Jupiter planet, and seems to support the argument.
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you :)

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Kudos [?]: 735 [3], given: 44

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Time to apply!
Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Posts: 197

Kudos [?]: 148 [0], given: 166

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 2: 660 Q50 V29
GMAT 3: 690 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.2
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Nov 2011, 20:49
E .
Check for great explanations at

http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/cr- ... t8541.html
http://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2011/02/ ... ce-problem
_________________

Didn't give up !!! Still Trying!!

Kudos [?]: 148 [0], given: 166

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 02 Apr 2012
Posts: 2

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 1

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Apr 2012, 10:30
raghavakumar85 wrote:
C is the best... POE

HOW DID u eliminate B?

I guess B is the ri8 answer

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 1

Retired Moderator
User avatar
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1628

Kudos [?]: 1124 [0], given: 109

Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 May 2012, 22:10
+1 C

Both statements are simple premises.
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 1124 [0], given: 109

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Apr 2012
Posts: 46

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 12

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 May 2012, 09:23
jamifahad wrote:
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with
Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere
in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. Nevertheless, some
indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer
atmosphere. After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented
traces of sulfur.
The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain
sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments
had penetrated this cloud layer
, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least
large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following
roles?

A. The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second


acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.
B. The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides
evidence in support of the truth of that claim.
C. The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the
conclusion of the argument.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the
second is that conclusion.
E. The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an
explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.

Can someone please help me understand this CR question? I just can't seem to understand Bo(w)l(e)d-Face CR.



1 diagraming
the conclusion is :it is likely that some of the fragments were at least
large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned
up

evidences to support
the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere
the comet fragment size was revealed by analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere with unprecedent level of sulfurs
not coming from the fragment themselves but from jupiter cloud layer

2. ANALYSE proposed choices
a wrong : both evidences are going in the same direction ,
b wrong it is not a claim not a conclusion
c ok
d it is not the conclusion
e no consideration given
they are completing ; the second one is not a counterpremise

hope this help


best regards


keira

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 12

VP
VP
avatar
S
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 1393

Kudos [?]: 168 [0], given: 916

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2012, 02:27
BOLD PHRASE- TIME

it take me a long time to solve bold phrase, 2 minute for understanding argument. 1 minutes for reading answer choices. Above question takes me 3 minute to understand the argument, 20 second for reading answer choices. total 3minute 20 second.

how to improve the time.

pls, help

Kudos [?]: 168 [0], given: 916

BSchool Forum Moderator
avatar
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 888

Kudos [?]: 735 [0], given: 44

Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2012, 02:49
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
@thangvietnam: Understanding the over all or general idea of CR boldface question is unavoidable. The first thing you need is to read the international news everyday. You will become familiar with the relation between sentences...

Furthermore, The below link maybe useful to you to learn how to solve the CR boldface more effectively :D. Just enjoy it.


_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you :)

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Kudos [?]: 735 [0], given: 44

1 KUDOS received
VP
VP
User avatar
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1378

Kudos [?]: 1704 [1], given: 62

Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Dec 2012, 04:02
1
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the
comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied
spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur
after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,
it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second
provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a
[color=#fbaf5c]consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
_________________

Prepositional Phrases Clarified|Elimination of BEING| Absolute Phrases Clarified
Rules For Posting
www.Univ-Scholarships.com


Last edited by Vyshak on 05 Jun 2017, 10:24, edited 1 time in total.
Updated OA

Kudos [?]: 1704 [1], given: 62

VP
VP
User avatar
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1378

Kudos [?]: 1704 [0], given: 62

Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Dec 2012, 07:06
Yeah, sorry for that.
Edited the post.
Infact I too have seen this question earlier, but the answer choices were different.
_________________

Prepositional Phrases Clarified|Elimination of BEING| Absolute Phrases Clarified
Rules For Posting
www.Univ-Scholarships.com

Kudos [?]: 1704 [0], given: 62

Expert Post
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 623

Kudos [?]: 535 [0], given: 16

Location: India
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2012, 03:31
Marcab wrote:
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the
comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied
spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur
after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,
it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second
provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a
consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

Source: Jamboree

OA
[Reveal] Spoiler:
soon


We can eliminate Choices B and C because the first boldface contains nothing that weighs against the conclusion of the argument. Choice D can be similarly eliminated because the second boldface says nothing against the conclusion but in fact is the conclusion. Choice A is a bit tricky. But if you look carefully look at the first boldface, it is not something which he is explaining. It is something he uses to explain something else which is the second boldface. So you are now left with Choice E which makes perfect sense.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna
http://www.sravnatestprep.com/regularcourse.php

Premium Material
Standardized Approaches

Kudos [?]: 535 [0], given: 16

VP
VP
User avatar
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1378

Kudos [?]: 1704 [0], given: 62

Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2012, 03:49
Hii Sri.
I will really appreciate if you explain the choice E. I reduced the options to A and E but thereafter I was confused. Moreover since you said that in A first boldface is not something which he is explaining, I could have also said that in E the first boldface is not a judgement.
_________________

Prepositional Phrases Clarified|Elimination of BEING| Absolute Phrases Clarified
Rules For Posting
www.Univ-Scholarships.com

Kudos [?]: 1704 [0], given: 62

Expert Post
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 623

Kudos [?]: 535 [0], given: 16

Location: India
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2012, 03:52
Marcab wrote:
Hii Sri.
I will really appreciate if you explain the choice E. I reduced the options to A and E but thereafter I was confused. Moreover since you said that in A first boldface is not something which he is explaining, I could have also said that in E the first boldface is not a judgement.


Dear Marcab,

It is only the belief of the astronomers that is offered as a support. So I think it is ok to consider it as a judgement.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna
http://www.sravnatestprep.com/regularcourse.php

Premium Material
Standardized Approaches

Kudos [?]: 535 [0], given: 16

Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 623

Kudos [?]: 535 [2], given: 16

Location: India
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2012, 08:32
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
Marcab wrote:
Hii Sri.
I will really appreciate if you explain the choice E. I reduced the options to A and E but thereafter I was confused. Moreover since you said that in A first boldface is not something which he is explaining, I could have also said that in E the first boldface is not a judgement.


To add to my explanation , a judgement is something which is subjective and is not objective. In this case since the support is based on what the astronomers think is correct and less on the actual facts, the support advanced is more a subjective one .
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna
http://www.sravnatestprep.com/regularcourse.php

Premium Material
Standardized Approaches

Kudos [?]: 535 [2], given: 16

VP
VP
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1078

Kudos [?]: 662 [0], given: 70

Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2012, 10:36
Marcab wrote:
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the
comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied
spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur
after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,
it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second
provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a
consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

Source: Jamboree

OA
[Reveal] Spoiler:
soon


HI Sri

It will be really helpful if you can break the argument into conclusion and premise and than present your explanation.....Because I still think that Second is not a conclusion it is a part of Explanation to the issues raised in first bold face.
BUt Marcab really good one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kudos [?]: 662 [0], given: 70

VP
VP
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1078

Kudos [?]: 662 [0], given: 70

Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2012, 10:50
Marcab wrote:
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the
comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied
spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur
after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,
it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second
provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a
consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

Source: Jamboree

OA
[Reveal] Spoiler:
soon


The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur<<<<<<<<<<<<<I think its a fact which is presented by the astronomer......to support the fact that the fragments crumbled to pieces by the effect of sulfur present in the atmosphere, and i dont think that breaking away of comets by the effect of sulfur is the conclusion of the argument its jsut a premise"

The second bole face is part of a sentence that begins with major Premise and not conclusion indicator ie Since Hence i do not think so it cannot be the conclusion. Moreover here the construction says Since X , Y and is a prediction i.e it is a claim and claim cannot be conclusion.

hence I stand by Option A!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kudos [?]: 662 [0], given: 70

Expert Post
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 623

Kudos [?]: 535 [0], given: 16

Location: India
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2012, 16:26
Archit143 wrote:
Marcab wrote:
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the
comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied
spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur
after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,
it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up
the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second
provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a
consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

Source: Jamboree

OA
[Reveal] Spoiler:
soon


HI Sri

It will be really helpful if you can break the argument into conclusion and premise and than present your explanation.....Because I still think that Second is not a conclusion it is a part of Explanation to the issues raised in first bold face.
BUt Marcab really good one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Dear Archit143,

For clarity I am separating the premise into parts. The second part is part of the first boldface and we can see it helps in arriving at the conclusion.

Premise 1 of the argument: comet fragments penetrated the cloud layer, means sulfur would seep in to Jupiter's outer atmosphere from the cloud layer below. We find traces of sulfur in the outer atmosphere but for that we need sulfur to be present in the cloud layer.

Premise 2 of the argument: Many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below the outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

The Conclusion of the argument: So, "it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up."

Kindly note that that the astronomers are interested in finding out the size of the fragments. So the second boldface is indeed the conclusion.

The argument does not explain why the cloud layer below the outer atmosphere contain sulfur. So choice A is wrong.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna
http://www.sravnatestprep.com/regularcourse.php

Premium Material
Standardized Approaches

Kudos [?]: 535 [0], given: 16

VP
VP
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1078

Kudos [?]: 662 [0], given: 70

Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2012, 19:45
Below Explanation is from Manhattan's link....explanation is by Ron...........Really straight fwd explained why second is the conclusion......................

first of all, no explanation is offered for the statement that the fragments didn't contain sulfur. that's just stated as an observation - it's not explained at all.

what is explained is that the fragments DID have sulfur after penetrating jupiter's atmosphere. however, no explanation is provided for why the fragments were devoid of sulfur in the first place.

second, it appears that you've got the basic structure of a passage backward. you don't use the conclusion to justify other statements - you use other statements to justify the conclusion!
if statement X justifies statement Y, then statement Y (not statement X) is the conclusion out of those two.

Kudos [?]: 662 [0], given: 70

Director
Director
User avatar
Status: My Thread Master Bschool Threads-->Krannert(Purdue),WP Carey(Arizona),Foster(Uwashngton)
Joined: 28 Jun 2011
Posts: 879

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 57

GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Jan 2013, 12:19
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
OA is E

http://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2011/02/ ... ce-problem

Explained throughly..
_________________

General GMAT useful links-->

Indian Bschools Accepting Gmat | My Gmat Daily Diary | All Gmat Practice CAT's | MBA Ranking 2013 | How to Convert Indian GPA/ Percentage to US 4 pt. GPA scale | GMAT MATH BOOK in downloadable PDF format| POWERSCORE CRITICAL REASONING BIBLE - FULL CHAPTER NOTES | Result correlation between GMAT and GMAT Club's Tests | Best GMAT Stories - Period!

More useful links-->

GMAT Prep Software Analysis and What If Scenarios| GMAT and MBA 101|Everything You Need to Prepare for the GMAT|New to the GMAT Club? <START HERE>|GMAT ToolKit: iPhone/iPod/iPad/Android application|

Verbal Treasure Hunt-->

"Ultimate" Study Plan for Verbal on the GMAT|Books to Read (Improve Verbal Score and Enjoy a Good Read)|Best Verbal GMAT Books 2012|Carcass Best EXTERNAL resources to tackle the GMAT Verbal Section|Ultimate GMAT Grammar Book from GC club [Free Download]|Ultimate Sentence Correction Encyclopedia|Souvik's The Most Comprehensive Collection Of Everything Official-SC|ALL SC Rules+Official Qs by Experts & Legendary Club Members|Meaning/Clarity SC Question Bank by Carcass_Souvik|Critical Reasoning Shortcuts and Tips|Critical Reasoning Megathread!|The Most Comprehensive Collection Of Everything Official- CR|GMAT Club's Reading Comprehension Strategy Guide|The Most Comprehensive Collection Of Everything Official- RC|Ultimate Reading Comprehension Encyclopedia|ALL RC Strategy+Official Q by Experts&Legendary Club Members

----
---
--
-


1 KUDOS = 1 THANK


Kick Ass Gmat

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 57

Intern
Intern
avatar
Status: Preparing...
Joined: 25 Mar 2013
Posts: 27

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 14

Location: United States
Sat: V
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT Date: 07-22-2013
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jul 2013, 14:42
"but many astronomers believe ........-- this is clearly a judgement

"it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up" -- Clearly this is a conclusion based on the words used to express the intention.
hence E

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 14

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its   [#permalink] 08 Jul 2013, 14:42

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 32 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its

  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®.