Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
May 1212:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products.
May 1408:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
Most GMAT test-takers are intimidated by the hardest GMAT Verbal questions. In this session, Target Test Prep GMAT instructor Erika Tyler-John, a 100th percentile GMAT scorer, will show you how top scorers break down challenging Verbal questions..- Jun 10
06:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
21 Apr 2023, 09:50
Kudos
Bookmarks
Quote:
Hello EducationAisle AjiteshArun
The entire thread does not talk about OPTION D.
Let's negate OPTION D
Frobisher did
So , IF F had wrong soil samples (instead of Kodlunarn Island, it had soil of other Canadian Island) then the CONCLUSION is broken down as it was not the method which was inaccurate rather the sample was inaccurate instead.
Hence, I found OPTION D correct.
Please guide.
21 Apr 2023, 19:48
Kudos
Bookmarks
PriyamRathor
Hi PriyamRathor,
We can't go directly from this:
PriyamRathor
to this:
PriyamRathor
Have a look at the following statements:
1. In 2010, a tutor took the GMAT and scored 700.
2. In 2020, that tutor took the GMAT again and scored 750.
3. Therefore, at some point during his or her career, the tutor must have become better at taking the GMAT.
Does this argument assume that in 2010, the tutor did not take the GRE? Keep in mind that taking the GRE does not automatically mean that the tutor could not have taken the GMAT. That is, it's possible for a tutor to have taken both exams in the same year.
Similarly, look at option D:
JCLEONES
The question tells us that F had soil from KI tested. The only thing that option D tells us is that he did not get soil samples from other Canadian islands tested. The negation of D ("F did have soil samples from at least one other Canadian island examined for gold content") does not tell us that F did not get those samples from KI.
In other words, the samples D talks about are in addition to (not "instead of") those from KI.
30 Jul 2025, 06:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
🔍 Step-by-Step Approach with Negation Technique
🧠 Negate Each Answer Choice and Test Its Impact
(A) The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century.
Negation: The gold content of the soil is not much lower today than it was in the 16th century.
👉 This supports the argument because it confirms the low content is consistent across time.
✅ This choice is not necessary — the argument can still hold if gold content hasn’t changed.
Eliminate.
[hr]
(B) The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island.
Negation: The two expeditions did mine the same part of the island.
👉 Still doesn’t affect the assumption about the accuracy of testing methods.
Not relevant to the conclusion about testing methods.
Eliminate.
[hr]
(C) The methods used to assess gold content of the soil samples provided by Frobisher were different from those generally used in the sixteenth century.
Negation: The methods used by Frobisher were not different from those generally used.
👉 Whether or not his methods were different doesn’t matter — the argument is about accuracy, not historical comparison.
Not necessary.
Eliminate.
[hr]
(D) Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content.
Negation: Frobisher did have soil samples from other islands examined.
👉 Again, doesn’t affect the conclusion about the Kodlunarn Island sample and the inaccuracy of testing methods.
Not necessary.
Eliminate.
[hr]
(E) Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.
Negation: Gold was added to the soil samples before they were examined.
👉 🔥 This undermines the conclusion. If gold was added artificially, the methods may have been accurate — it was the sample that was fake.
➡️ That means the testing methods weren’t necessarily inaccurate — the conclusion falls apart.
✅ This is the correct assumption — the argument depends on this being false (i.e., gold was not added).
[hr]
✅ Correct Answer: (E)
Because if (E) is false (gold was added), then the conclusion (testing methods were inaccurate) no longer follows.
- Identify the Conclusion
The conclusion is:Quote: - Look for the Evidence
- Frobisher's soil samples were reported to have high gold content.
- Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions — neither found gold.
- Modern analysis shows very low gold content.
- Find the Assumption
Assumptions are unstated premises that must be true for the conclusion to hold. - Apply the Negation Technique
The correct assumption, when negated, will weaken or destroy the argument’s conclusion.
🧠 Negate Each Answer Choice and Test Its Impact
(A) The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century.
Negation: The gold content of the soil is not much lower today than it was in the 16th century.
👉 This supports the argument because it confirms the low content is consistent across time.
✅ This choice is not necessary — the argument can still hold if gold content hasn’t changed.
Eliminate.
[hr]
(B) The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island.
Negation: The two expeditions did mine the same part of the island.
👉 Still doesn’t affect the assumption about the accuracy of testing methods.
Not relevant to the conclusion about testing methods.
Eliminate.
[hr]
(C) The methods used to assess gold content of the soil samples provided by Frobisher were different from those generally used in the sixteenth century.
Negation: The methods used by Frobisher were not different from those generally used.
👉 Whether or not his methods were different doesn’t matter — the argument is about accuracy, not historical comparison.
Not necessary.
Eliminate.
[hr]
(D) Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content.
Negation: Frobisher did have soil samples from other islands examined.
👉 Again, doesn’t affect the conclusion about the Kodlunarn Island sample and the inaccuracy of testing methods.
Not necessary.
Eliminate.
[hr]
(E) Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.
Negation: Gold was added to the soil samples before they were examined.
👉 🔥 This undermines the conclusion. If gold was added artificially, the methods may have been accurate — it was the sample that was fake.
➡️ That means the testing methods weren’t necessarily inaccurate — the conclusion falls apart.
✅ This is the correct assumption — the argument depends on this being false (i.e., gold was not added).
[hr]
✅ Correct Answer: (E)
Because if (E) is false (gold was added), then the conclusion (testing methods were inaccurate) no longer follows.
