Last visit was: 26 Apr 2024, 10:24 It is currently 26 Apr 2024, 10:24

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
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 4
Own Kudos [?]: 199 [199]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6921
Own Kudos [?]: 63672 [41]
Given Kudos: 1774
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Send PM
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2011
Posts: 258
Own Kudos [?]: 1371 [30]
Given Kudos: 46
Location: United States
WE:Corporate Finance (Manufacturing)
Send PM
General Discussion
User avatar
CEO
CEO
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 2709
Own Kudos [?]: 1539 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
Agree with D. Humans could have arrived as early as 11400 years ago, not 18000.
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 188
Own Kudos [?]: 138 [2]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
2
Kudos
D for me too.
Answer coming from the man who stays in Colorado. :-D
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 03 Aug 2004
Posts: 24
Own Kudos [?]: 43 [4]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
3
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Awesome Dr Watson,

This is a classical problem. It is of a type "Alternative Explanation" -- kaplan 800

These type of CR's pose a implicit problem where they state that there is only 1 way of doing things. The best answer to weaken such assumptions is to provide another way of doing the same thing.

Like in this case,
It tries to pose the problem that Alaska-Siberia bridge was the only way to travel to that place and since the bridge was blocked there was no way a human could reach there between the period
Solution,
find an argument that shows another way of travelling till there

Hence the correct answer is the one that confirms my argument.

by
Sheerluck Jones
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Code:
Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, is known to be 11,200 years old. Researchers reasoned that, since glaciers prevented human migration south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago, humans must have come to the Americas more than 18,000 years ago.

Which of the following pieces of new evidence would cast doubt on the conclusion drawn above?

A.Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was determined that the charcoal from the Colorado site was at least 11,400 years old.

B.Another campsite was found in New Mexico with remains dated at 16,000 years old.

C.A computer simulation of glacial activity showed that it would already have been impossible for humans to travel south overland from Alaska 18,500 years ago.

D.Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was proved that an ice-free corridor allowed passage south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge at least 11,400 years ago.

E.Studies of various other hunting-gathering populations showed convincingly that, once the glaciers allowed passage, humans could have migrated from Alaska to Colorado in about 20 years.
Current Student
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 218
Own Kudos [?]: 474 [5]
Given Kudos: 70
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE:Human Resources (Human Resources)
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
2
Kudos
3
Bookmarks
PREMISE 1. Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, is known to be 11,200 years old.
PREMISE 2. Researchers reason that, glaciers prevented human migration south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago.
CONCLUSION- Humans must have come to the Americas more than 18,000 years ago.

ASSUMPTION- CHARCOAL FOUND AT COLORADO COULD NOT HAVE BEEN THAT OF HUMAN WHO MIGRATED BETWEEN 18-11000 YEARS AGO, FROM ALASKA....BUT OF HUMANS THAT WOULD HAVE MIGRATED BEFORE THIS BLOCK PERIOD...

WEAKENER---- COULD BE.....1. SOME EVIDENCE THAT HUMANS DID COME SOUTH DURING THIS BLOCK PERIOD ALSO....
2. NATIVE HUMANS( NOT THE MIGRATED ONES) KNOWN TO HAVE RESIDED ALL THROUGH THIS PERIOD IN COLORADO..
3. NOT POSSIBLE FOR HUMANS TI COME SOUTH MORE THAN 18000 YEARS BACK...

A.Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was determined that the charcoal from the Colorado site was at least 11,400 years old. STILL FALLS UNDER THE BLOCK PERIOD.....DOES NOT WEAKEN THE ASSUMPTION, ABOVE, IN ANY CASE

B.Another campsite was found in New Mexico with remains dated at 16,000 years old. STILL FALLS UNDER THE BLOCK PERIOD.....DOES NOT WEAKEN THE ASSUMPTION, ABOVE, IN ANY CASE

C.A computer simulation of glacial activity showed that it would already have been impossible for humans to travel south overland from Alaska 18,500 years ago. THATS OK BUT THEY COULD HAVE MIGRATED IN THE PERIOD-- 18,500 - 18,000

D.Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was proved that an ice-free corridor allowed passage south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge at least 11,400 years ago....CORRECT... AS PER OUR ASSUMPTION ABOVE.....

E.Studies of various other hunting-gathering populations showed convincingly that, once the glaciers allowed passage, humans could have migrated from Alaska to Colorado in about 20 years....TIME TAKEN TO MIGRATE IS IRRELEVANT
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 343
Own Kudos [?]: 4586 [0]
Given Kudos: 606
Concentration: Technology, Other
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
Can someone help me with option B. Doesn't this mean that people/human were there in 16000 and hence weakens the conclusion.
I chose D becaus it mentions that there was a way to cross the bridge but need a reason to understand why B is wrong.
SVP
SVP
Joined: 20 Mar 2014
Posts: 2362
Own Kudos [?]: 3626 [0]
Given Kudos: 816
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.7
WE:Engineering (Aerospace and Defense)
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
JarvisR wrote:
Can someone help me with option B. Doesn't this mean that people/human were there in 16000 and hence weakens the conclusion.
I chose D becaus it mentions that there was a way to cross the bridge but need a reason to understand why B is wrong.


This option is a far fetched information. Even if there was another campsite dated at 16000 years , the conclusion is about people who crossed the land bridge and not about people who could have already been there !! The conclusion talks about the migration south from the Alaska Siberia bridge at least 18000 years ago!
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 28 Jun 2015
Posts: 18
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [9]
Given Kudos: 42
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 610 Q49 V27
GPA: 2.5
WE:Project Management (Telecommunications)
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
9
Kudos
I use timeline in Math to solve this question,
check the picture, author is talking about charcoal and human migration on different timeline.
So, if we can figure out the what happened at what time
the argument will be much easier for us.
kudos, if you like my way.
Attachments

Image 1.png
Image 1.png [ 94.58 KiB | Viewed 61069 times ]

User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 07 Mar 2016
Posts: 54
Own Kudos [?]: 167 [1]
Given Kudos: 163
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
1
Bookmarks
mejia401 wrote:
Conclusion: humans must have come to the Americas more than 18,000 years ago.
Reasoning: A blockade prevented humans traveling south between 18,000 to 11,000 years ago. If some information showed that the blockade was passable, then the new evidence would cast doubt on the conclusion. Correct answer weakens the conclusion; incorrect answers are neutral to the conclusion or strengthen the conclusion.

A.Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was determined that the charcoal from the Colorado site was at least 11,400 years old. Neutral answer. If the charcoal was exactly 11,400 years old, then the conclusion is weakened. Whereas, if the charcoal was greater than 18,000 years old, then this would strengthen the conclusion. It can go both ways.

B.Another campsite was found in New Mexico with remains dated at 16,000 years old. Neutral. The correct answer must prove that people crossed in between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago. This proves that someone was there 16,000 years ago; the humans could have crossed 2,000 years prior, around 18,000, or sometime shortly after 18,000 years ago.

C.A computer simulation of glacial activity showed that it would already have been impossible for humans to travel south overland from Alaska 18,500 years ago. Strengthens. If the it were impossible to travel south overland from 18,500 years ago, then the conclusion would be strengthened.

D.Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was proved that an ice-free corridor allowed passage south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge at least 11,400 years ago. Correct. If it were possible to cross at least 11,400 years ago, it provides doubt that the glacier prevented all human migration between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago.

E.Studies of various other hunting-gathering populations showed convincingly that, once the glaciers allowed passage, humans could have migrated from Alaska to Colorado in about 20 years. Out of scope/Neutral. This does nothing the conclusion.

IMO D


Hi!

Thank you for this wonderful explanation. Now i have just one doubt remaining and that is, the purpose of 1st statement. I don't understand from where the charcoal came into the whole scene. Should i have ignored this statement and read rest of the argument?
Thanks
Manager
Manager
Joined: 24 Jan 2017
Posts: 121
Own Kudos [?]: 324 [0]
Given Kudos: 106
GMAT 1: 640 Q50 V25
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
GPA: 3.48
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
ashutoshsh wrote:
mejia401 wrote:
Conclusion: humans must have come to the Americas more than 18,000 years ago.
Reasoning: A blockade prevented humans traveling south between 18,000 to 11,000 years ago. If some information showed that the blockade was passable, then the new evidence would cast doubt on the conclusion. Correct answer weakens the conclusion; incorrect answers are neutral to the conclusion or strengthen the conclusion.

A.Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was determined that the charcoal from the Colorado site was at least 11,400 years old. Neutral answer. If the charcoal was exactly 11,400 years old, then the conclusion is weakened. Whereas, if the charcoal was greater than 18,000 years old, then this would strengthen the conclusion. It can go both ways.

B.Another campsite was found in New Mexico with remains dated at 16,000 years old. Neutral. The correct answer must prove that people crossed in between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago. This proves that someone was there 16,000 years ago; the humans could have crossed 2,000 years prior, around 18,000, or sometime shortly after 18,000 years ago.

C.A computer simulation of glacial activity showed that it would already have been impossible for humans to travel south overland from Alaska 18,500 years ago. Strengthens. If the it were impossible to travel south overland from 18,500 years ago, then the conclusion would be strengthened.

D.Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was proved that an ice-free corridor allowed passage south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge at least 11,400 years ago. Correct. If it were possible to cross at least 11,400 years ago, it provides doubt that the glacier prevented all human migration between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago.

E.Studies of various other hunting-gathering populations showed convincingly that, once the glaciers allowed passage, humans could have migrated from Alaska to Colorado in about 20 years. Out of scope/Neutral. This does nothing the conclusion.

IMO D


Hi!

Thank you for this wonderful explanation. Now i have just one doubt remaining and that is, the purpose of 1st statement. I don't understand from where the charcoal came into the whole scene. Should i have ignored this statement and read rest of the argument?
Thanks


"Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, is known to be 11,200 years old." You meant this sentence?

I think the author mentions this point to avoid the possibility that humans might come to Colorado after 11,000 years ago. Just assume that humans must have come to Colorado before any charcoal existed. Therefore, author states the first sentence to eliminate a weakener, thus strengthening his conclusion.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2013
Posts: 267
Own Kudos [?]: 167 [0]
Given Kudos: 201
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GRE 1: Q163 V155
GPA: 3.95
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
RockGmat wrote:
Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, is known to be 11,200 years old. Researchers reasoned that, since glaciers prevented human migration south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago, humans must have come to the Americas more than 18,000 years ago.

Which of the following pieces of new evidence would cast doubt on the conclusion drawn above?

(A) Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was determined that the charcoal from the Colorado site was at least 11,400 years old.

(B) Another campsite was found in New Mexico with remains dated at 16,000 years old.

(C) A computer simulation of glacial activity showed that it would already have been impossible for humans to travel south overland from Alaska 18,500 years ago.

(D) Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was proved that an ice-free corridor allowed passage south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge at least 11,400 years ago.

(E) Studies of various other hunting-gathering populations showed convincingly that, once the glaciers allowed passage, humans could have migrated from Alaska to Colorado in about 20 years.


Hi everyone,

Request one of the experts to take a stab at this.

I am still not able to understand why D is the answer.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 12 Oct 2018
Posts: 23
Own Kudos [?]: 11 [1]
Given Kudos: 11
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q48 V39
GPA: 2.61
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
1
Kudos
EMPOWERgmatRichC, egmat, GMATNinja, VeritasKarishma

Dear Experts,
Please clear my queries:
1) I feel both option C and D weakens the conclusion. However, I am unable to understand why option D is preferred.\
option C: Weakens the author's conclusion by eliminating the possibility of human arrival before 18500 years. However, it is not full proof since leaves open the 18000-18500 duration.
option D: Casts doubt for the duration between 18000 & 11400 years ago. However, not full proof since leaves open the possibility of more than 18k years ago.

Moreover, i am not comfortable with the "charcoal" info with reference to the overall argument. The charcoal is if dated 11200 years old, how the argument is coorelating it with humans coming more than 18k years ago.
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 18 Dec 2018
Posts: 34
Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
Conclusion: Humans must have come to the Americas more than 18,000 years ago.
Reasoning: A blockade prevented humans traveling south between 18,000 to 11,000 years ago. If some information showed that the blockade was passable, then the new evidence would cast doubt on the conclusion. Correct answer weakens the conclusion; incorrect answers are neutral to the conclusion or strengthen the conclusion.
A. Neutral answer. If the charcoal was exactly 11,400 years old, then the conclusion is weakened. If the charcoal was more than 18,000 years old, then this would have strengthened the conclusion. It can go both ways.
B. Neutral. The correct answer must prove that people crossed in between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago. This proves that someone was there 16,000 years ago; the humans could have crossed 2,000 years prior, around 18,000, or sometime shortly after 18,000 years ago.
C. Strengthens. If it was impossible to travel south overland from 18,500 years ago, then the conclusion would be strengthened.
D. Correct. If it was possible to cross at least 11,400 years ago, it provides doubt that the glacier prevented all human migration between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago. Hence, D is the answer.
E. Out of scope/Neutral. This does nothing the conclusion.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 19 Jul 2019
Posts: 8
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [0]
Given Kudos: 31
Send PM
Re: Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
RockGmat wrote:
Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, is known to be 11,200 years old. Researchers reasoned that, since glaciers prevented human migration south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago, humans must have come to the Americas more than 18,000 years ago.

Which of the following pieces of new evidence would cast doubt on the conclusion drawn above?

(A) Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was determined that the charcoal from the Colorado site was at least 11,400 years old.

(B) Another campsite was found in New Mexico with remains dated at 16,000 years old.

(C) A computer simulation of glacial activity showed that it would already have been impossible for humans to travel south overland from Alaska 18,500 years ago.

(D) Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was proved that an ice-free corridor allowed passage south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge at least 11,400 years ago.

(E) Studies of various other hunting-gathering populations showed convincingly that, once the glaciers allowed passage, humans could have migrated from Alaska to Colorado in about 20 years.


Although the question is from official GMAT source I highly doubt the quality of this question because this question expects the reader to have some geographical knowledge. I did not at all understood this question being non-native to that area because it expects me to know that Alaska=Americas (Which really took me a while to understand), also where Mexico lies relative to alaska (Mentioned in one of the answer choices)? and some sort of geographical knowledge of siberia as well.
Any thoughts on this??
Current Student
Joined: 02 Sep 2019
Posts: 77
Own Kudos [?]: 70 [0]
Given Kudos: 82
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q50 V31
WE:Information Technology (Commercial Banking)
Send PM
Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
If we are able to challenge the author's statement that "Humans migrated to the Americas more than 18,000 years ago" with counter-evidence. That would weaken the argument's conclusion

(A) Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was determined that the charcoal from the Colorado site was at least 11,400 years old.
It doesn't talk about human migration

(B) Another campsite was found in New Mexico with remains dated at 16,000 years old.
Irrelevant

(C) A computer simulation of glacial activity showed that it would already have been impossible for humans to travel south overland from Alaska 18,500 years ago.
This supports the argument conclusion by saying that human migration was not possible 18500 years ago

(D) Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was proved that an ice-free corridor allowed passage south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge at least 11,400 years ago.
So there is a way for humans t migrate during the 11,200- 18,000 year period. So humans need not have settled prior to 18,000

(E) Studies of various other hunting-gathering populations showed convincingly that, once the glaciers allowed passage, humans could have migrated from Alaska to Colorado in about 20 years.
Irrelevant
Intern
Intern
Joined: 06 Mar 2020
Posts: 34
Own Kudos [?]: 13 [1]
Given Kudos: 80
Send PM
Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
1
Kudos
mejia401 wrote:
Conclusion: humans must have come to the Americas more than 18,000 years ago.
Reasoning: A blockade prevented humans traveling south between 18,000 to 11,000 years ago. If some information showed that the blockade was passable, then the new evidence would cast doubt on the conclusion. Correct answer weakens the conclusion; incorrect answers are neutral to the conclusion or strengthen the conclusion.

A.Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was determined that the charcoal from the Colorado site was at least 11,400 years old. Neutral answer. If the charcoal was exactly 11,400 years old, then the conclusion is weakened. Whereas, if the charcoal was greater than 18,000 years old, then this would strengthen the conclusion. It can go both ways.

B.Another campsite was found in New Mexico with remains dated at 16,000 years old. Neutral. The correct answer must prove that people crossed in between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago. This proves that someone was there 16,000 years ago; the humans could have crossed 2,000 years prior, around 18,000, or sometime shortly after 18,000 years ago.

C.A computer simulation of glacial activity showed that it would already have been impossible for humans to travel south overland from Alaska 18,500 years ago. Strengthens. If the it were impossible to travel south overland from 18,500 years ago, then the conclusion would be strengthened.

D.Using new radiocarbon dating techniques, it was proved that an ice-free corridor allowed passage south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge at least 11,400 years ago. Correct. If it were possible to cross at least 11,400 years ago, it provides doubt that the glacier prevented all human migration between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago.

E.Studies of various other hunting-gathering populations showed convincingly that, once the glaciers allowed passage, humans could have migrated from Alaska to Colorado in about 20 years. Out of scope/Neutral. This does nothing the conclusion.

IMO D


Great, thanks this is really helpful.

But my question is, does choice (D) not attack the premise "..glaciers prevented human migration south from the Alaska-Siberia land bridge between 18,000 and 11,000 years ago" - to say that actually it didn't seems to conflict with the fact. Or are the ice-free corridor and the land-bridge completely separate entities?

I was also thrown off by the new word 'hearth' - if you have any tips?
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1374
Own Kudos [?]: 207 [0]
Given Kudos: 189
Send PM
Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
avigutman -

I thought option D when combined with the premise -- strengthened the conclusion

Given the word 'ago' -- we are talking about items left of zero on the number line.

Analogy -

I owe at-least 10,000 dollars

That means i owe minimum 10,000 dollars and i may owe MORE (i may owe 11,000 dollars or i may owe 12,000 dollars or i may owe a billion dollars ) -- i am going MORE TO THE LEFT on the number line given we are talking about negatives.

I came at least 10 days before the wedding

That means i may have come 20 days before the wedding ) -- i am going MORE TO THE LEFT on the number line given we are talking about negatives.

Simirlarly, in Option D, this must mean the ice-free corridor allowed for passage at-least 11,400 years ago

This impies, the ice-free corridor allowed for passage perhaps 11,500 years ago or 12,000 years ago or 15,000 years ago or 18,000 years ago, all the way to negative infinity

Originally posted by jabhatta2 on 19 Jan 2022, 11:13.
Last edited by jabhatta2 on 19 Jan 2022, 12:32, edited 9 times in total.
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1374
Own Kudos [?]: 207 [0]
Given Kudos: 189
Send PM
Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
If i draw the timeline -- option D is saying -- passage of humans was allowed during the time zone highlighted in green (all the way to negative infinity)

Per the premise, no one travelled during the red period

So if combine option D + what it is the premise (premises cant be false) - what remains is the gray zone (all the way to negative infinitiy)

So option D is pointing to the fact that humans probably could travel in the grey zone (i.e. prior to 18,000 years ago)

This strengthens the conclusion, not weakens it

Clearly something wrong in my logic
Attachments

present tense 3.JPG
present tense 3.JPG [ 65.38 KiB | Viewed 17932 times ]

GMAT Club Bot
Charcoal from a hearth site in Colorado, 2,000 miles south of Alaska, [#permalink]
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6921 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

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