GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 09 Apr 2020, 15:30

### 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

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.

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 19 Jan 2015
Posts: 1

### Show Tags

03 Jan 2016, 09:07
The article discusses a fascinating topic pertaining to the moai construction on eastern island and the decrease in population on the island due to the moai construction. The professor in the lecture discusses that the moai construction did not led to a decrease in population on the island. Therefore the reading passage fails to provide the quintessential information that substantiates the argument that the population decrease on the eastern island was not due to moai construction. The following essay attempts to identify those fundamental differences in order to make the view of the objective clear.

Firstly, the passage discusses that for the building of moai the people on island used nonproductive resources of the island and made tracts from them to move the moais. However the professor clears that the moais were not moved by the tracts but they were moved by series of ropes which were tied to the moais and dozens of men used to roll them to move them. Clearly disparity exists between the passage and the evidence exhibited by the professor in the lecture. As a result we can safely assume that the moais were moved by the ropes but not the tracts.

Secondly, the passage puts forth an idea that the palm trees on the island were extensively used for the construction of moai. In contrast the classroom discussion confirms that the palm trees were not destroyed by the moai people instead they were destroyed by the the deadly effect of the rats which were extensive on the island. Moreover the first settlers of the island brought rats as their food on their return from island. Consequently, indeed we can argue that the palm trees were distracted by the rats.

Finally, the article states that the population on the moai was decreased from 20,000 people to 2,000 people when the Europeans first visited the island. However the professor confirms that this was just a guess thinking that the island was formed in 480 A.D, but recent discoveries confirmed that the moai was actually constructed in 1280 A.D. during which the island can afford a total population of 2000 people. As a result we can confirm that the population on the island was not decreased due to moai construction.

In summary, while various perspectives and viewpoints about the issue exist, there are many supporting evidences that the moai construction did not led to destruction of the island.
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Moderator: carcass