It is currently 13 Dec 2017, 03:17

# Decision(s) Day!:

CHAT Rooms | Ross R1 | Kellogg R1 | Darden R1 | Tepper R1

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# CR: Here is another one. Would like an explanation please

Author Message
SVP
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1509

Kudos [?]: 1071 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

23 Dec 2007, 07:00
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Meteorologists say that if only they could design an accurate mathematical model of the atmosphere with all its complexities, they could forecast the weather with real precision. But this is an idle boast, immune to any evaluation, for any inadequate weather forecast would obviously be blamed on imperfections in the model.

Which of the following, if true, could best be used as a basis for arguing against the author’s position that the meteorologists’ claim cannot be evaluated?

(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts.

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.

(D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time.

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct.

Last edited by tarek99 on 23 Dec 2007, 07:57, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 1071 [0], given: 1

Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 628

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Here is another one. Would like an explanation ple [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Dec 2007, 07:31
tarek99 wrote:
Meteorologists say that if only they could design an accurate mathematical model of the atmosphere with all its complexities, they could forecast the weather with real precision. But this is an idle boast, immune to any evaluation, for any inadequate weather forecast would obviously be blamed on imperfections in the model.

Which of the following, if true, could best be used as a basis for arguing against the author’s position that the meteorologists’ claim cannot be evaluated?

(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts.

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.
(D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time.

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct.

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 251

Kudos [?]: 113 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Dec 2007, 08:07
I would go with B.

We are looking for something that negates the author's point that weather predictions would not improve even though mathematical models improve...

Kudos [?]: 113 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 92

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

24 Dec 2007, 15:06
I would go with B, as we are looking for some validations here and B does it partially.

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 275

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Here is another one. Would like an explanation ple [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Dec 2007, 16:43
tarek99 wrote:
Meteorologists say that if only they could design an accurate mathematical model of the atmosphere with all its complexities, they could forecast the weather with real precision. But this is an idle boast, immune to any evaluation, for any inadequate weather forecast would obviously be blamed on imperfections in the model.

Which of the following, if true, could best be used as a basis for arguing against the author’s position that the meteorologists’ claim cannot be evaluated?

(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts.

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.

(D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time.

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct.

B for me too.

A) talks only about data, not the model
C) irrelevant
D) irrelevant
E) irrelevant

Only B talks about the increase in accuracy of models and corresponding increase in the precision of weather forecasts.

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
Posts: 1078

Kudos [?]: 699 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Here is another one. Would like an explanation ple [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2007, 02:29
The authors say that it is impossibile to evaluate meteorologists' claim in that every inadequate forecast would be caused by an imperfection in the model. But the problem is not the imperfection..it is the inability of meteorologist...why not E??? what's OA?????

Kudos [?]: 699 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 116

Kudos [?]: 93 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2007, 02:49
B.
Meteorologists claim that an accurate mathematical model of atmosphere could result in precise forecast of the weather. The author says this claim cannot be evaluated because any inadequate forecast would be blamed on inaccuracy of the model.
But, if it is known that with every improvement in the model is clearly measurable in terms of the precision of forecast, that is to say that there exists a clear relationship between accuracy of the model and precision of forecasts, author's claim stands false.

Kudos [?]: 93 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 07 Oct 2005
Posts: 141

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

Location: Boston,MA

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2007, 18:59
One more for E
_________________

--gregspirited

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

Intern
Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Posts: 4

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

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2007, 20:51
A looks good too..

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

Director
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 566

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Here is another one. Would like an explanation ple [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2007, 22:08
go for B,

tarek99 wrote:
Meteorologists say that if only they could design an accurate mathematical model of the atmosphere with all its complexities, they could forecast the weather with real precision. But this is an idle boast, immune to any evaluation, for any inadequate weather forecast would obviously be blamed on imperfections in the model.

Which of the following, if true, could best be used as a basis for arguing against the author’s position that the meteorologists’ claim cannot be evaluated?

(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood.----->

neutral, the author speaks about an accurate mathematical model with all its complexities, the answer choice is about some approximation of accurate mathematical model.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts.---->

B says that precise weather forecast is authomatic result of accurate mathematical model (whenever there is A, there is B). This makes the criticism (blue text) obsolete.

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.
---->

irrelevant

(D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time.---->

irrelevant

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct.--->

so what?, the info is irrelevant

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1509

Kudos [?]: 1071 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2007, 22:12
OA is B

Kudos [?]: 1071 [0], given: 1

Intern
Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 48

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Here is another one. Would like an explanation ple [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2007, 06:22
Edited-OKAY B seems likely although A is trap

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Here is another one. Would like an explanation ple   [#permalink] 28 Dec 2007, 06:22
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# CR: Here is another one. Would like an explanation please

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 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®.