GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 23 Sep 2018, 03:31

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

Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 01 Feb 2010
Posts: 1
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Feb 2010, 11:14
Scientist: A controversy in paleontology centers on the question of whether prehistoric human ancestors began to develop sophisticated tools before or after they came to stand upright. I argue that they stood upright first, simply because advanced toolmaking requires free use of hands, and standing upright makes this possible.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most weakens the scientist's argument?

A) Many animals that do not stand upright have learned to make basic tools.

B) Advanced hunting weapons have been discovered among the artifacts belonging to prehistoric human ancestors who did not stand upright.

C) Many prehistoric human ancestors who stood upright had no sophisticated tools.

D) Those prehistoric human ancestors who first came to stand upright had no more dexterity with their hands than did those who did not stand upright.

E) Many of the earliest sophisticated tools did not require their users to be able to stand upright.


Hello Franklin,

I am really sorry to pull out an old question. however, i had a query.
according to ur earlier post, the correct answer is B.

I am wondering y D may not be the rt choice.

Here's my explanation. Correct me where i'm goin wrong.According to the stimulus:
"advanced toolmaking requires free use of hands, and standing upright makes this possible"

Thus: unstated assumption: it is necessary to use hands to make sophisticated tools.

If we can prove that inspite of standing upright, prehistoric ancestors din't have the capability to use their hands properly, it would weaken the argument significantly, and thus option D seems apt.

Please clarify.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 814
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Apr 2010, 02:08
I marked E.
It is nowhere mentioned in the argument that researchers found the sweet-potato parasite. The only thing mentioned as the conclusion - all the efforts has been so far is wasted. So, I infer that the parasite is still hidden.

Franklin wrote:
D is the correct answer! Good job everyone. I will post another question tonight.

I'm timing myself on these question types. Feel free to include how long it took you to correctly answer the question. I did this question in a minute and sixteen seconds.

The process of getting the right answer:

I first identified the conclusion which is easy on this particular question because of the conclusion indicator "Therefore".

Conclusion: Therefore, the search for a parasite has so far been wasted effort.

I next read the question stem which indicates an assumption question type. So I need to identify a missing piece that logically leads to the conclusion.

Summarizing the premises gives us the info that entomologists identified (incorrectly) the sweet-potato whitefly as the crop pest and looked for a parasite (out of an unidentified number of parasites) to control the whitefly population. Unfortunately for the entomologists the silverleaf whitefly was the culprit. In order for the 3 years of effort to be wasted none of the parasites identified for the sweet-potato whitefly are parasites for the silverleaf whitefly.

On to the answer choices ...

A) All varieties of the sweet-potato whitefly are serious crop pests.

This answer is irrelevant. It could very well be true but we want to know why the entomologists' effort was wasted.

B) If a crop pest has a parasite, that parasite can always be used to control that pest.

We don't care whether a parasite will control the pest population. We are trying to ascertain why the entomologists' effort was wasted.

C) The chances of successfully identifying a useful parasite of the new pest have increased since the proper identification of the pest.

We don't care about the chances. Totally irrelevant.

D) No parasite of the sweet-potato whitefly is also a parasite of the silverleaf whitefly.

Bingo.

E) In the last three years, the entomologists found no parasites of the sweet-potato whitefly.

This may seem like a good answer choice but it conflicts with the information in the passage which states that the entomologists confined their search to parasites of the sweet-potato whitefly. This essentially means that the sweet-potato whitefly has parasites.

_________________

Want to improve your CR: http://gmatclub.com/forum/cr-methods-an-approach-to-find-the-best-answers-93146.html
Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 07 Jul 2010
Posts: 8
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jul 2010, 10:07
sprtng wrote:
good Q...I am going with B, as we need to prove that Babies has not been contaminated in this experiment...

tough one with A tho but didn't choose it because it doesn't eliminate the possibility of these samples has all been contaminated prior to this experiment...



Premise given :That babies pay more attetntion to blah blah blah......

suddenly in conclusion :its said that humans thus have a natural tendency to --------......

Note very carefully ,how can a thing for babies be held true for entire humans ,obviously the assumption that whats true for babies must also be true for other age groups as well ,so Onluy A matches this option.....correct me if i am wrong......
Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Last few days....Have pressed the throttle
Joined: 20 Jun 2010
Posts: 63
WE 1: 6 years - Consulting
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Sep 2010, 02:43
powerka wrote:
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
Most plants have developed chemical defenses against parasites. The average plant contains about 40 natural pesticides - chemical compounds toxic to bacteria, fungi, and other parasites. Humans ingest these natural pesticides without harm every day. Therefore, the additional threat posed by synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans is minimal.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:

A) Humans have been consuming natural plant pesticides from millennia and have had time to adapt to them.

B) The concentrations of natural pesticides in plants are typically much lower than the concentrations of synthetic pesticides in sprayed crop plants.

C) Natural plant pesticides are typically less potent than synthetic pesticides, whose toxicity is highly concentrated.

D) Natural plant pesticides generally serve only as defenses against specific parasites, whereas synthetic pesticides are often harmful to a wide variety of organisms.

E) The synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans usually have chemical structures similar to those of the natural pesticides produced by the plants.


Answer E clearly is the only option that does not weaken the argument. In fact, it may even strengthen it.

Sorry Franklin, can't give a better explanation; as with most CR questions on this thread, I found the answers pretty straightforward.

Cheers,

The final fight after POE is between A and D. D looks a strong contender as it has no effect on the argument, it talks about effect to wide variety of organisms - It does not tell us anything about the affect of synthetic pesticide on humans.

Answer is D.
_________________

Consider giving Kudos if my post helps in some way

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Posts: 424
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Sep 2010, 05:19
Franklin wrote:
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
Scientist: A controversy in paleontology centers on the question of whether prehistoric human ancestors began to develop sophisticated tools before or after they came to stand upright. I argue that they stood upright first, simply because advanced toolmaking requires free use of hands, and standing upright makes this possible.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most weakens the scientist's argument?

A) Many animals that do not stand upright have learned to make basic tools.

B) Advanced hunting weapons have been discovered among the artifacts belonging to prehistoric human ancestors who did not stand upright.

C) Many prehistoric human ancestors who stood upright had no sophisticated tools.

D) Those prehistoric human ancestors who first came to stand upright had no more dexterity with their hands than did those who did not stand upright.

E) Many of the earliest sophisticated tools did not require their users to be able to stand upright.


Scientist's argument: Prehistoric human ancestors stood upright prior to the development of sophisticated tools.

What weakens the argument? Sophisticated tools were created before our prehistoric ancestors stood upright. (The mental image of how it must have looked caused me to chuckle.)

A) Who cares about many animals ... we only care about our prehistoric ancestors.

B) Correct. I find that the correct answer usually changes the wording just enough to make it appear different from the wording or terminology in the stimulus. For example, the stimulus uses the words "sophisticated tools" and in this answer choice the words "advanced hunting weapons."

C) Irrelevant.

D) How does this info weaken the scientist's argument? It doesn't.

E) Great ... but that still doesn't weaken the argument that prehistoric ancestors stood upright prior to the development of sophisticated tools.

Answer choice is B.


I think B is actually the wrong answer as sophisticated tools do not have to be advanced hunting tools. They may comprise of a nut cracker.

C is a better answer even though its not exactly satisfactory because atleast it states the relation.
One may argue that some may not have the advanced tools.
_________________

If you found the reply to be helpful, give kudos.

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Posts: 424
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Sep 2010, 08:48
powerka wrote:
snipertrader wrote:
Some students attending a small university with a well-known choir live off campus. From the fact that all music majors are members of the choir, a professor in the music department concluded that none of the students who live off campus is a music major.

I think this needs diagramming ? I narrowed it down to C and D..but confused. Is there a method to solve these kind of questions.

The professor's conclusion is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

A) None of the students who live off campus is a member of the choir.

B) None of the students who are music majors has failed to join the choir.

C) Some of the students who do not live off campus are not music majors.

D) All students who live on campus are music majors.

E) All students who are members of the choir are music majors.


When boggled by these kind of questions, use a Venn diagram.

The professor concluded that "none of the students who live off campus is a music major" = "all music majors live on campus". Given that all music majors are members of the choir, if all members of the choir live on campus, then all music majors live on campus. Therefore, answer is A.


Why cant it be B, None of the students who are music majors have failed to join the choir, because all the music majors are members of choir.

Thanks.
_________________

If you found the reply to be helpful, give kudos.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: ISB, Hyderabad
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 151
WE 1: 4 years Software Product Development
WE 2: 3 years ERP Consulting
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Oct 2010, 20:46
Franklin wrote:
Okay, so I got a PM stating that the questions I've posted so far are too easy. I guess I need to rectify that! :-D

It's bonus Wednesday ... I will post three questions since I will not be able to provide a question tomorrow (attending a seminar).

I thought about adding my reasoning to the discussion but I think that would be superfluous especially since snipertrader did such a fantastic job!

Quote:
In an experiment, researchers played a series of musical intervals - two-note sequences - to a large diverse group of six-month old babies. They found that the babies paid significantly more attention when the intervals were perfect octaves, fifths, or fourths than otherwise. These intervals are prevalent in the musical systems of most cultures around the world. Thus, humans probably have a biological predisposition to pay more attention to those intervals than to others.

Which one of the following, if true most strengthens the argument?

A) Several similar experiments using older children and adults found that these subjects, too, had a general tendency to pay more attention to octaves, fifths, and fourths than to other musical intervals. -- Does not provide additional info.

B) None of the babies in the experiment had previous exposure to music from any culture.

C) All of the babies in the experiment had been exposed to music drawn equally from a wide variety of cultures around the world.

D) In a second experiment, these same babies showed no clear tendency to notice primary colors more than other colors.

E) Octaves, fifths, and fourths were played more frequently during the experiment than other musical intervals were.


biological predisposition is the keyword I believe. So if we can prove that the babies just were acting out of their instinct I think we strengthen the argument. And B pretty much does that.
_________________

-AD

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: ISB, Hyderabad
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 151
WE 1: 4 years Software Product Development
WE 2: 3 years ERP Consulting
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Oct 2010, 20:55
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
Editorialist: Despite the importance it seems to have in our lives, money does not really exist. This is evident from the fact that all that would be needed to make money disappear would be a universal loss of belief in it. We witness this phenomenon on a small scale daily in the rises and falls of financial markets, whose fluctuations are often entirely independent of concrete causes and are the result of mere beliefs of investors.

The conclusion of the editorialist's argument can be properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

A) Anything that exists would continue to exist even if everyone were to stop believing in it.

B) Only if one can have mistaken beliefs about a thing does that thing exist, strictly speaking.

C) In order to exist, an entity must have practical consequences for those who believe in it.

D) If everyone believes in something, then that thing exists.

E) Whatever is true of money is true of financial markets generally.


Confused between C and E. I would take E as argument does not talk about "practical consequences". Eliminated D because I believe the question does not say everyone needs to believe in a thing, it says that if everyone does not believe in something that thing will cease to exist.
_________________

-AD

Intern
Intern
User avatar
Status: it won't happen in one day but it'll happen one day
Joined: 22 May 2010
Posts: 41
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Oct 2010, 21:36
Quote:
Editorialist: Despite the importance it seems to have in our lives, money does not really exist. This is evident from the fact that all that would be needed to make money disappear would be a universal loss of belief in it. We witness this phenomenon on a small scale daily in the rises and falls of financial markets, whose fluctuations are often entirely independent of concrete causes and are the result of mere beliefs of investors.

The conclusion of the editorialist's argument can be properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

A) Anything that exists would continue to exist even if everyone were to stop believing in it.

B) Only if one can have mistaken beliefs about a thing does that thing exist, strictly speaking.

C) In order to exist, an entity must have practical consequences for those who believe in it.

D) If everyone believes in something, then that thing exists.

E) Whatever is true of money is true of financial markets generally.

hmmmm.....a mindbender
my pick A

argument:money disappears if people stop believing in money....so its not real
A states-Anything that exists would continue to exist even if everyone were to stop believing in it.
assumption: hence money which is not real disappears once belief in it vanishes....so it in reality does not exist for if it existed even if everyone were to stop believing in it it would have not disappeared.
_________________

Life is all about ass; you're either covering it, laughing it off, kicking it, kissing it, busting it, trying to get a piece of it, or behaving like one.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 70
Location: New Delhi, India
Schools: Chicago Booth, Harvard, LBS, INSEAD, Columbia
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Nov 2010, 01:42
Franklin wrote:
Here's a question that is a little more challenging. I actually had a question on the GMAT with the same argument structure but it was quite a bit longer.

Quote:
Reza: Language requires the use of verbal signs for objects as well as for feelings. Many animals can vocally express hunger, but only humans can ask for an egg or an apple by naming it. And using verbal signs for objects requires the ability to distinguish these objects from other objects, which in turn requires conceptual thought.

If all of Reza's statements are true, then which one of the following must also be true?

A) Conceptual thought is required for language

B) Conceptual thought requires the use of verbal signs for objects.

C) It is not possible to think conceptually about feelings.

D) All humans are capable of conceptual thought.

E) The vocal expressions of animals other than humans do not require conceptual thought.


I thought the answer was D. Can't find an OA posted by Franklin. I think A is wrong because conceptual thought may or may not be required for language (since language consists of both verbal signs for objects AS WELL AS FEELINGS). Therefore, although conceptual thought may be required for ONE PART of language, but not for the other.

Why D is correct: since one of the premise is that "only humans can distinguish between objects", why can't we generalize to assume that ALL humans can? It does not mention MOST/MANY/FEW/SOME.

Somebody please help with this!
_________________

Read about my GMAT prep at http://gmatting.blogspot.com/
1st Feb '11 -- Actual GMAT : 730 (Q48 V42) AWA 6.0

My Practice GMAT Scores
29th Jan '11 -- GMATPrep#2 : 700 (Q47 V38)
23rd Jan '11 -- MGMAT Practice Test #3 : 670 (Q45 V36)
19th Jan '11 -- GMATPrep#1 v.1 : 710 (Q49 V37)
15th Jan '11 -- GMATPrep#1 : 720 (Q47 V42)
11th Jan '11 -- MGMAT Practice Test #2 : 740 (Q47 V44)
6th Jan '11 -- Kaplan#2 : 620 (Q40 V35)
28th Dec '10 -- PowerPrep#1 : 670 (Q47 V35)
30th Oct '10 -- MGMAT Practice Test #1 : 660 (Q45 V35)
12th Sept '10 -- Kaplan Free Test : 610 (Q39 V37)
6th Dec '09 -- PR CAT #1 : 650 (Q44 V37)
25th Oct '09 -- GMATPrep#1 : 620 (Q44 V34)

If you feel like you're under control, you're just not going fast enough.
A goal without a plan is just a wish.
You can go higher, you can go deeper, there are no boundaries above or beneath you.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 70
Location: New Delhi, India
Schools: Chicago Booth, Harvard, LBS, INSEAD, Columbia
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Nov 2010, 08:15
Any idea where Franklin is and if he plans on posting any more of these questions?
_________________

Read about my GMAT prep at http://gmatting.blogspot.com/
1st Feb '11 -- Actual GMAT : 730 (Q48 V42) AWA 6.0

My Practice GMAT Scores
29th Jan '11 -- GMATPrep#2 : 700 (Q47 V38)
23rd Jan '11 -- MGMAT Practice Test #3 : 670 (Q45 V36)
19th Jan '11 -- GMATPrep#1 v.1 : 710 (Q49 V37)
15th Jan '11 -- GMATPrep#1 : 720 (Q47 V42)
11th Jan '11 -- MGMAT Practice Test #2 : 740 (Q47 V44)
6th Jan '11 -- Kaplan#2 : 620 (Q40 V35)
28th Dec '10 -- PowerPrep#1 : 670 (Q47 V35)
30th Oct '10 -- MGMAT Practice Test #1 : 660 (Q45 V35)
12th Sept '10 -- Kaplan Free Test : 610 (Q39 V37)
6th Dec '09 -- PR CAT #1 : 650 (Q44 V37)
25th Oct '09 -- GMATPrep#1 : 620 (Q44 V34)

If you feel like you're under control, you're just not going fast enough.
A goal without a plan is just a wish.
You can go higher, you can go deeper, there are no boundaries above or beneath you.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 Sep 2010
Posts: 149
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Dec 2010, 02:39
IMO..its B
because the question says that " had either one or the other phenomenon failed to occur, this would be consistent with the economy as a whole being healthy."

So if we know that the economy is not doing well than there is a problem with one of the two mentioned areas.

IMO..its B
because the question says that " had either one or the other phenomenon failed to occur, this would be consistent with the economy as a whole being healthy."

So if we know that the economy is not doing well than there is a problem with one of the two mentioned areas.

IMO..its B
because the question says that " had either one or the other phenomenon failed to occur, this would be consistent with the economy as a whole being healthy."

So if we know that the economy is not doing well than there is a problem with one of the two mentioned areas.
Verbal Forum Moderator
avatar
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 421
WE 1: 4 years Tech
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Dec 2010, 01:49
Franklin wrote:
For anyone who decides to answer the question please put down your reasoning ... even if you think it blows! :-D Writing out how you approach the question will help everyone reading the thread.

The following question took me 1 minute 8 seconds to answer...
(This stimulus is approximately the length of the 3 CR questions I saw on the actual exam. Definitely threw me for a loop!)

Quote:
It is proposed to allow the sale, without prescription, of a medication that physicians currently prescribe to treat the common ear inflammation called "swimmer's ear." The principal objection is that most people lack the expertise for proper self-diagnosis and might not seek medical help for more serious conditions in the mistaken belief that they have swimmer's ear. Yet in a recent study, of 1,000 people who suspected that they had swimmer's ear, 84 percent had made a correct diagnosis - a slightly better accuracy rate than physicians have in diagnosing swimmer's ear. Thus, clearly, most people can diagnose swimmer's ear in themselves without ever having to consult a physician.

Which one of the following, if true, most undermines the conclusion?

A) Case in which swimmer's ear progresses to more serious infections are very rare.

B) Most of those who suspected incorrectly that they had swimmer's ear also believed that they had other ailments that in fact they did not have.

C) Most of the people who diagnosed themselves correctly had been treated by a physician for a prior occurrence of swimmer's ear.

D) Physicians who specialize in ear diseases are generally able to provide more accurate diagnoses than those provided by general practitioners.

E) For many people who develop swimmer's ear, the condition disappears without medical or pharmaceutical intervention.

Guys whats the conclusion here ?
I feel its "It is proposed to allow the sale, without prescription, of a medication that physicians currently prescribe to treat the common ear inflammation called "swimmer's ear."
"most people can diagnose swimmer's ear in themselves without ever having to consult a physician." is a sub-conclusion
_________________

My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !
Please let me know your opinion about the Chandigarh Gmat Centrehttp://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-experience-at-chandigarh-india-centre-111830.html

Verbal Forum Moderator
avatar
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 421
WE 1: 4 years Tech
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Dec 2010, 04:45
Franklin wrote:
Franklin wrote:
The Law School Admission Council created this question back in 2003-4 ... I thought the question to be quite prophetic!

Quote:
The economy is doing badly. First, the real estate slump has been with us for some time. Second, car sales are at their lowest in years. Of course, had either one or the other phenomenon failed to occur, this would be consistent with the economy as a whole being healthy. But, their occurrence together makes it quite probable that my conclusion is correct.

Which one of the following inferences is most strongly supported by the information above?

A) If car sales are at their lowest in years, then it is likely that the economy is doing badly.

B) If the economy is doing badly, then either the real estate market or the car sales market is not healthy.

C) If the real estate market is healthy, then it is likely that the economy as a whole is healthy.

D) If the economy is in a healthy state, then it is unlikely that the real estate and car sales markets are both in a slump.

E) The bad condition of the economy implies that both the real estate and the car sales markets are doing badly.


The answer is D.


Can we discuss this question
_________________

My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !
Please let me know your opinion about the Chandigarh Gmat Centrehttp://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-experience-at-chandigarh-india-centre-111830.html

Verbal Forum Moderator
avatar
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 421
WE 1: 4 years Tech
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Dec 2010, 04:54
jeeteshsingh wrote:
Quote:
It is proposed to allow the sale, without prescription, of a medication that physicians currently prescribe to treat the common ear inflammation called "swimmer's ear." The principal objection is that most people lack the expertise for proper self-diagnosis and might not seek medical help for more serious conditions in the mistaken belief that they have swimmer's ear. Yet in a recent study, of 1,000 people who suspected that they had swimmer's ear, 84 percent had made a correct diagnosis - a slightly better accuracy rate than physicians have in diagnosing swimmer's ear. Thus, clearly, most people can diagnose swimmer's ear in themselves without ever having to consult a physician.

Which one of the following, if true, most undermines the conclusion?

A) Case in which swimmer's ear progresses to more serious infections are very rare.

B) Most of those who suspected incorrectly that they had swimmer's ear also believed that they had other ailments that in fact they did not have.

C) Most of the people who diagnosed themselves correctly had been treated by a physician for a prior occurrence of swimmer's ear.

D) Physicians who specialize in ear diseases are generally able to provide more accurate diagnoses than those provided by general practitioners.

E) For many people who develop swimmer's ear, the condition disappears without medical or pharmaceutical intervention.


IMO... C... 1min 30 seconds....

Although,I got this right,I wanna discuss the feasibility of E being a strong contender.
Because if the problem goes away by itself,then why do away with the requirement of a prescription.Let those who have the swimmers ear problem make do without a medication.
_________________

My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !
Please let me know your opinion about the Chandigarh Gmat Centrehttp://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-experience-at-chandigarh-india-centre-111830.html

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: what we want to do, do it as soon as possible
Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 87
Location: Vietnam
WE 1: 5.0
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Mar 2011, 06:58
1
powerka wrote:
Franklin wrote:
Sorry guys for my sporadic posting. I was in NYC for a conference.

Quote:
Bram Stoker's 1897 novel Dracula portrayed vampires - the "undead" who roam at night to such the blood out of living people - as able to turn into bats. As a result of the pervasive influence of this novel, many people now assume that a vampire's being able to turn into a bat is an essential part of vampire myths. However, this assumption is false, for vampire myths existed in Europe long before Stoker's book.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) At least one of the European vampire myths that predated Stoker's book did not portray vampires as strictly nocturnal.

B) Vampire myths in Central and South America, where real vampire bats are found, portray vampires as able to turn into bats.

C) Vampire myths did not exist outside Europe before the publication of Stoker's Dracula.

D) At least one of the European vampire myths that predated Stoker's book did not portray vampires as able to turn into bats.

E) At the time he wrote Dracula, Stoker was familiar with earlier European vampire myths.


Answer:


The author concludes that people should not assume that "vampires turning into bats is essential" because "vampire myths existed in Europe long before Stoker's book".

The answer must contain "vampires turning into bats" and "Europe".

D is the only answer that does so.

I was confused by the usage of "at least one" in the option (D), so if "at least one of EU myths did not portray vampires as able to turn into bats", what about the other myths? What if the other myths mention that vampires are able to turn into bats?
_________________

Consider giving me kudos if you find my explanations helpful so i can learn how to express ideas to people more understandable.

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 45
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Feb 2012, 10:16
Quote:
For the last three years, entomologists have been searching for a parasite to help control a whitefly that has recently become a serious crop pest. Believing this new pest to be a variety of sweet-potato whitefly, the entomologists confined their search to parasites of the sweet-potato whitefly. Genetic research now shows the new pest to be a distinct species, the silverleaf whitefly. Therefore, the search for a parasite has so far been wasted effort.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

A) All varieties of the sweet-potato whitefly are serious crop pests.
B) If a crop pest has a parasite, that parasite can always be used to control that pest.
C) The chances of successfully identifying a useful parasite of the new pest have increased since the proper identification of the pest.
D) No parasite of the sweet-potato whitefly is also a parasite of the silverleaf whitefly.
E) In the last three years, the entomologists found no parasites of the sweet-potato whitefly.
[/quote]

premise 1 : entomologist have been searching for parasite to control a variety of whitefly.
premise 2 : Entomologist confined their search to parasites of sweet potato whitefly
premise 3 : genetic research shows new pest to be a distinct species - the silverfly whitefly
conclusion : search for parasite so far has been a waste

A valid assumption here would be something on the line of parasites of sweet potato are entirely different from parasites of silverleaf whitefly therefore previous search for parasites is no longer useful.

Option D seems to match that assumption and is the correct answer IMO. There is a case a supporter assumption in my view.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Posts: 83
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Feb 2012, 19:10
Why is the OA B and not D?

A) Many animals that do not stand upright have learned to make basic tools. Talks about basic tools

B) Advanced hunting weapons have been discovered among the artifacts belonging to prehistoric human ancestors who did not stand upright. belonging need not mean they developed those tools?????

C) Many prehistoric human ancestors who stood upright had no sophisticated tools. Many doesn't include all

D) Those prehistoric human ancestors who first came to stand upright had no more dexterity with their hands than did those who did not stand upright. Hand movement has been linked to standing upright on the basis of which the argument is based , making sophisticated tools requires hand movement which is possible by standing upright, Since D states both sanding and not standing upright permits hand movement which is needed for building sophisticated tools, it weaken the argument??????

E) Many of the earliest sophisticated tools did not require their users to be able to stand upright. Talks about use and not development
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Posts: 83
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Feb 2012, 19:55
While 65% of the eligible voters who were recently polled favor Perkins over Samuels in the coming election, the results of that poll are dubious because it was not based on a representative sample. Given that Perkins predominately advocates the interests of the upper-middle class and that the survey was conducted at high-priced shopping malls, it is quite probably that Perkin's supporters were overrepresented.

Which one of the following statements most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

A) The poll was intentionally designed to favor Perkins over Samuels.

B) Samuel's supporters believe that they were probably not adequately represented in the poll.

C) The poll's results probably do not accurately represent the opinions of the voters in the coming election.

D) Samuels is quite likely to have a good chance of winning the coming election.

E) Those who designed the poll should have considered more carefully where to conduct the survey.

IMO C, what is OA?
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Posts: 83
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Feb 2012, 20:05
30. While 65% of the eligible voters who were recently polled favor Perkins over Samuels in the coming election, the results of that poll are dubious because it was not based on a representative sample. Given that Perkins predominately advocates the interests of the upper-middle class and that the survey was conducted at high-priced shopping malls, it is quite probably that Perkin's supporters were overrepresented.

Which one of the following statements most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

A) The poll was intentionally designed to favor Perkins over Samuels.
B) Samuel's supporters believe that they were probably not adequately represented in the poll.
C) The poll's results probably do not accurately represent the opinions of the voters in the coming election.
D) Samuels is quite likely to have a good chance of winning the coming election.
E) Those who designed the poll should have considered more carefully where to conduct the survey.

IMO C, whst is OA?
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread &nbs [#permalink] 19 Feb 2012, 20:05

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8    Next  [ 150 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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®.