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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
Paleontologist: About 2.8 million years ago, many species that lived near the ocean floor suffered substantial population declines. These declines coincided with the onset of an ice age. The notion that cold killed those bottom-dwelling creatures outright is misguided, however; temperatures near the ocean floor would have changed very little. Nevertheless, the cold probably did cause the population declines, though indirectly. Many bottom-dwellers depended for food on plankton, small organisms that lived close to the surface and sank to the bottom when they died. Most probably, the plankton suffered a severe population decline as a result of sharply lower temperatures at the surface, depriving many bottom-dwellers of food.
In the paleontologist's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first introduces the hypothesis proposed by the paleontologist; the second is a judgment offered in spelling out that hypothesis. (B) The first introduces the hypothesis proposed by the paleontologist; the second is a position that thepaleontologist opposes. (C) The first is an explanation challenged by the paleontologist; the second is evidence on which the argument base to make hypothesis. (D) The first is a judgment advanced in support of a conclusion reached by the paleontologist; the second is that conclusion. (E) The first is a generalization put forward by the paleontologist; the second presents certain exceptional cases in which that generalization does not hold.
------ stuck between A and D - can someone clarify the difference. thanks!
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Verbal Questions Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
D says that the second bold face is the conclusion. The conclusion of the palentologist is " The notion that cold killed those bottom-dwelling creatures outright is misguided"
I would pick A.
gmat blows
Paleontologist: About 2.8 million years ago, many species that lived near the ocean floor suffered substantial population declines. These declines coincided with the onset of an ice age. The notion that cold killed those bottom-dwelling creatures outright is misguided, however; temperatures near the ocean floor would have changed very little. Nevertheless, the cold probably did cause the population declines, though indirectly. Many bottom-dwellers depended for food on plankton, small organisms that lived close to the surface and sank to the bottom when they died. Most probably, the plankton suffered a severe population decline as a result of sharply lower temperatures at the surface, depriving many bottom-dwellers of food.
In the paleontologist's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first introduces the hypothesis proposed by the paleontologist; the second is a judgment offered in spelling out that hypothesis. (B) The first introduces the hypothesis proposed by the paleontologist; the second is a position that thepaleontologist opposes. (C) The first is an explanation challenged by the paleontologist; the second is evidence on which the argument base to make hypothesis. (D) The first is a judgment advanced in support of a conclusion reached by the paleontologist; the second is that conclusion. (E) The first is a generalization put forward by the paleontologist; the second presents certain exceptional cases in which that generalization does not hold.
------ stuck between A and D - can someone clarify the difference. thanks!
Paleontologist: About 2.8 million years ago, many species that lived near the ocean floor suffered substantial population declines. These declines coincided with the onset of an ice age. The notion that cold killed those bottom-dwelling creatures outright is misguided, however; temperatures near the ocean floor would have changed very little. Nevertheless, the cold probably did cause the population declines, though indirectly. Many bottom-dwellers depended for food on plankton, small organisms that lived close to the surface and sank to the bottom when they died. Most probably, the plankton suffered a severe population decline as a result of sharply lower temperatures at the surface, depriving many bottom-dwellers of food.
In the paleontologist's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first introduces the hypothesis proposed by the paleontologist; the second is a judgment offered in spelling out that hypothesis. (B) The first introduces the hypothesis proposed by the paleontologist; the second is a position that thepaleontologist opposes. (C) The first is an explanation challenged by the paleontologist; the second is evidence on which the argument base to make hypothesis. (D) The first is a judgment advanced in support of a conclusion reached by the paleontologist; the second is that conclusion. (E) The first is a generalization put forward by the paleontologist; the second presents certain exceptional cases in which that generalization does not hold.
------ stuck between A and D - can someone clarify the difference. thanks!
Show more
The difference btw a and d is that you should decide btw the two BF which one SUPPORT the other? In my interpretation, the second help spell out the first, so A win!
Just as a help , for all bold face questions do it step by step , read the entire argument, and
Read Bold face 1 . Verify : Is it a judgement, is it a conclusion, etc.. This way you would eliminate a few options.
Then move to the next bold statement, and do the same . This will always help in narrowing down to two options at most, and help in selecting the closest option.
When we read the entire statement together, it becomes confusing to comprehend, and hence boldface questions look extremely difficult though thats not always the case.
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Verbal Questions Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.