It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 15:07

### 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

# cr1000 meterologists

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 54

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Oct 2005, 22:11
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 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.

12. Which of the following, if true, could best be used as a basis for arguing against the authorтАЩs position that the meteorologistsтАЩ 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 [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 104

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

### Show Tags

30 Oct 2005, 23:32
B looks like correct answer to me.

It specifies that any gain in mathematical model will have a direct impact on the increase of weather forecast precision. Hence, in light of such evidence, the meteorologist's claim can be evaluated.

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

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 231

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

31 Oct 2005, 01:03
go B go..

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1700

Kudos [?]: 473 [0], given: 0

Location: Dhaka

### Show Tags

03 Nov 2005, 14:36
its B for me.
_________________

hey ya......

Kudos [?]: 473 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 223

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 0

Location: Germany

### Show Tags

06 Nov 2005, 10:32
I would choose B here. The claim is that an inadequate forecast will be blamed on imperfections in the model. If it can be shown, that there exists a causality of accuracy of forecasts and precision of forecasts this claim can be weakened.

can anybody provide OA?

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 08 Aug 2005
Posts: 102

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2005, 01:58
B for me

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 278

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

Location: CA, USA

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2005, 23:02
I would go with D
since we can indeed measure the accuracy of today's model - 80% for one full day ahead

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

07 Nov 2005, 23:02
Display posts from previous: Sort by