It is currently 20 Nov 2017, 01:09

### 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, weâ€™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 - Meteorologists

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 11 May 2006
Posts: 258

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2006, 10:06
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (00:18) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 4 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 authorĂ˘â‚¬â„˘s position that the meteorologistsĂ˘â‚¬â„˘ 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 [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2006
Posts: 326

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2006, 10:26
This is (B).Thrs a very similar question in the kaplan cd which talks about models for horse racing.
_________________

A well-balanced person is one who has a drink in each of his hands.

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
Posts: 700

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2006, 10:29
Looks like C.

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 524

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

Location: US

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2006, 10:39
Author claims that the model can't be evaluated because gains can't be measured.

C it is...it says that if the model is improved there will be gains seen in weather forecast

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

Intern
Joined: 26 Dec 2005
Posts: 42

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

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2006, 11:59
Can it be E?

My reasoning -
(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood. - A model that supports on some configurations is therefore not that accurate.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts. - The autor is interested in the ones that do not end up with clear gains in the precision of the weather forecasts. In the sense that how will they be explained - again by saying that in that scenario the model is not an accurate representation?

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.
- Are beginning to be constructed but do not say that they will be successfull and therefore may/ may not resort to excuses like an imperfect representation

(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 - If an accurate model can be constructed then the meteorologists will not be able to escape by blaming an inaccurate model for their faulty predictions since they have already classified it as accurate

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

Intern
Joined: 26 Dec 2005
Posts: 42

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

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2006, 12:00
Can it be E?

My reasoning -
(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood. - A model that supports on some configurations is therefore not that accurate.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts. - The autor is interested in the ones that do not end up with clear gains in the precision of the weather forecasts. In the sense that how will they be explained - again by saying that in that scenario the model is not an accurate representation?

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.
- Are beginning to be constructed but do not say that they will be successfull and therefore may/ may not resort to excuses like an imperfect representation

(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 - If an accurate model can be constructed then the meteorologists will not be able to escape by blaming an inaccurate model for their faulty predictions since they have already classified it as accurate

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

Intern
Joined: 26 Dec 2005
Posts: 42

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

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2006, 12:01
Can it be E?

My reasoning -
(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood. - A model that supports on some configurations is therefore not that accurate.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts. - The autor is interested in the ones that do not end up with clear gains in the precision of the weather forecasts. In the sense that how will they be explained - again by saying that in that scenario the model is not an accurate representation?

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.
- Are beginning to be constructed but do not say that they will be successfull and therefore may/ may not resort to excuses like an imperfect representation

(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 - If an accurate model can be constructed then the meteorologists will not be able to escape by blaming an inaccurate model for their faulty predictions since they have already classified it as accurate

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

Intern
Joined: 26 Dec 2005
Posts: 42

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

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2006, 12:02
Soory about the numerous posting.The site was giving me an error!

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

Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 377

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

Location: TX

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2006, 18:09
iced_tea 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 authorĂ˘â‚¬â„˘s position that the meteorologistsĂ˘â‚¬â„˘ 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

The key lies in the Question Stem "arguing against the authorĂ˘â‚¬â„˘s position "
Authers claim , accuracy cannot be evaluated.
B states that improvements in accuracy is accompanied by clear gains in precision. So contrary to authors claim, accuracy can be evaluated.

Last edited by ivymba on 28 Sep 2006, 09:11, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 1161

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2006, 18:25
B for me.

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 523

Kudos [?]: 71 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2006, 21:16
One more B.

Kudos [?]: 71 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1124

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

Location: Bangalore

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2006, 03:38
Add me to the B list. Took over 3 mins for this

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

Senior Manager
Joined: 11 May 2006
Posts: 258

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2006, 08:51
good job guys..
OA is B

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 31 Mar 2014
Posts: 20

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 1

Concentration: Operations, General Management
Schools: IIMA (PGPX)

### Show Tags

28 Aug 2014, 19:41
eteorologists 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 authorĂ˘â‚¬â„˘s position that the meteorologistsĂ˘â‚¬â„˘ claim cannot be evaluated?

Note: Its a weakner question. Conclusion : Scientists claim can't be evaluated. Assumption: There is not possible way to determine the accuracy of weather prediction.

(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood. -- Strengthens. Basically it says you dont need a universal model. But prediction can be done accurately. We need lower the belief that prediction can't be evaluated

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts.
This is right answer. We have perfect formula to measure success of the prediction.

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.
out of scope. What happens in the technology world of meteorlogical is out of scope of conclusoin. The model can't evaluate.
(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
Stregthens by saying that Meteorologists simply can't arrive this model on their own. What is the impact on evaluaton nothing

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 1

Re: CR - Meteorologists   [#permalink] 28 Aug 2014, 19:41
Display posts from previous: Sort by