It is currently 19 Sep 2017, 05:08

### 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

# Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 01 Nov 2007
Posts: 147

Kudos [?]: 423 [1], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jan 2008, 16:11
1
KUDOS
7
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

66% (01:06) correct 34% (01:25) wrong based on 2083 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.

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

(A) The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century.

(B) The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island.

(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.

(D) Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content.

(E) Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.

GMATPrep Code : VCR005704
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 423 [1], given: 0

CEO
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2554

Kudos [?]: 500 [1], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jan 2008, 16:36
1
KUDOS
JCLEONES wrote:
Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported,
Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there.
Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods
used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was
in the sixteenth century.
B. The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of
Kodlunarn Island.
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.
D. Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for
gold content.
E. Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples
were examined.

E. This is a very tricky one. (seen this before and had same answer by POE) but looking at it again. E makes a lot of sense. If gold were added then the methods were not inaccurate, but the results were not indicative of the actual content. This is different from accuracy. The methods used could still well have been very accurate in determing the amount of gold (or added gold) there was in the sample. So E is the winner.

Kudos [?]: 500 [1], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 95

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jan 2008, 16:41
why not c?

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 751

Kudos [?]: 228 [1], given: 8

Location: Oxford
Schools: Oxford'10

### Show Tags

08 Jan 2008, 12:30
1
KUDOS
rafiaiqbal wrote:
why not c?

This is a classic trap in CR. The question asks what is the assumption. An assumption can only lead to the conclusion that is made. The conclusion is that the dude's methods are inaccurate. C talks about the dude was using different methods. If that were the correct assumption, how could one make the conclusion that his methods were inaccurate? The assumption has to solidify the conclusion.

Therefore only E serves this purpose and is correct.

Kudos [?]: 228 [1], given: 8

Manager
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 53

Kudos [?]: 55 [2], given: 2

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 04:22
2
KUDOS
14
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.

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

(A) The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century.
(B) The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island.
(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.
(D) Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content.
(E) Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.

Kudos [?]: 55 [2], given: 2

Director
Joined: 12 Jul 2008
Posts: 514

Kudos [?]: 162 [2], given: 0

Schools: Wharton

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 04:27
2
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
fiesta wrote:
Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.

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

A. The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century.
B. The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island.
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.
D. Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content.
E. Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.

Premise shows discrepancy b/w Frobisher's soil sample and the two other data points (mining expeditions and modern soil samples). Correct answer must contain an alternate way for Frobisher's soil sample to test positive while explaining the other two data points.

E

Kudos [?]: 162 [2], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 53

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 05:01
zoinnk wrote:

Premise shows discrepancy b/w Frobisher's soil sample and the two other data points (mining expeditions and modern soil samples). Correct answer must contain an alternate way for Frobisher's soil sample to test positive while explaining the
other two data points.

E

I am extremely confused
conclusion: the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.
evidences:
- Frobisher had soil samples examined for gold content.
- Neither expedition found any gold there
- Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content.

E: Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined. >>>> It clearly weakens the conclusion

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 2

Director
Joined: 12 Jul 2008
Posts: 514

Kudos [?]: 162 [0], given: 0

Schools: Wharton

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 05:13
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
fiesta wrote:
zoinnk wrote:

Premise shows discrepancy b/w Frobisher's soil sample and the two other data points (mining expeditions and modern soil samples). Correct answer must contain an alternate way for Frobisher's soil sample to test positive while explaining the
other two data points.

E

I am extremely confused
conclusion: the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.
evidences:
- Frobisher had soil samples examined for gold content.
- Neither expedition found any gold there
- Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content.

E: Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined. >>>> It clearly weakens the conclusion

The author says the divergent results is a result of the original test being accurate.

He assumes, then, that there is no other explanation for these results.

Which of the answers is saying that he assumes there are no other explanations?
E: Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.

Kudos [?]: 162 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 31 Jul 2008
Posts: 31

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

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 05:39
I guess C, since the conclusion says the method was inaccurate.And one of the possibilty of that could be the method used by Frobisher and the one prevalent in 16th century were different.

Can any one plz point out the mistake in this reasoning.

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

VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1378

Kudos [?]: 390 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 06:15
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
fiesta wrote:
Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.

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

A. The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century. -> this even if negated does not make tyhe argument fall apart
B. The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island. -> this is again weakening the argument
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. -> This weakens the argument and is not an assumption
D. Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content. -> this is opposing the written
E. Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.-> IMO -> since if this were true we cannot comment on the authors view about Frobishers analysis

_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Kudos [?]: 390 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 322

Kudos [?]: 366 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 06:19
fiesta wrote:
Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.

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

E. Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.

For assupmtion questions: one has to find the link b/w the premise and the conclusion and the assumption has to support the conclusion.

Premises: had soil samples examined; found them to contain high gold content; exploration did not yield any gold
Conclusion: the methods to determine gold content were flawed.

Only E. supports the conclusion and makes it logical. If gold was added to the soil samples then the colclusion does not hold, hence only if we rule out the possibility that no gold was added to the soil sample will this conclusion be justifiable.

Kudos [?]: 366 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 53

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 06:52
OA: E
It is a ridiculous assumption. Anyway, when I read all explanations, I realize that E is the best. Thanks all

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 2

Director
Joined: 12 Jul 2008
Posts: 514

Kudos [?]: 162 [0], given: 0

Schools: Wharton

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 08:24
fiesta wrote:
OA: E
It is a ridiculous assumption. Anyway, when I read all explanations, I realize that E is the best. Thanks all

I think one of the ways GMAT questions trick people is by using correct answers that seem absurd in real life. Remember, this is GMAT universe, not real world...

Kudos [?]: 162 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Posts: 3

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

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2008, 13:49
This happened many times in the past, it's not rediculous at all. Just think, if your sponsor pays a ton of money for your expedition, you'd better have something to show for it. Else no more money for next time/beheading, depending on what era you live in.

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

VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1378

Kudos [?]: 390 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2008, 00:26
zoinnk wrote:
fiesta wrote:
OA: E
It is a ridiculous assumption. Anyway, when I read all explanations, I realize that E is the best. Thanks all

I think one of the ways GMAT questions trick people is by using correct answers that seem absurd in real life. Remember, this is GMAT universe, not real world...

Its just which best among the LOT hardly matters whether its feasible in real world DONT ever apply the personal fundae its just whats given in the premises
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Kudos [?]: 390 [0], given: 0

Manager
Status: I rest, I rust.
Joined: 04 Oct 2010
Posts: 121

Kudos [?]: 125 [0], given: 9

Schools: ISB - Co 2013
WE 1: IT Professional since 2006

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2010, 19:46
fiesta wrote:
Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.

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

(A) The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century.
(B) The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island.
(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.
(D) Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content.
(E) Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.

E
Have come across this question quite a number of times.
_________________

Respect,
Vaibhav

PS: Correct me if I am wrong.

Kudos [?]: 125 [0], given: 9

Manager
Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 133

Kudos [?]: 108 [0], given: 9

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2010, 21:28
E fits best
_________________

Trying to make CR and RC my strong points

Kudos [?]: 108 [0], given: 9

Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Nov 2010
Posts: 285

Kudos [?]: 85 [0], given: 44

Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
GMAT Date: 08-27-2012
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Manufacturing)

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2010, 23:02
can anyone please explain why C is not a correct option??
i am agree with C.
E doesn't make sense to me.
can any one tell me, where can i find the correct solution of this question apart from this discussion.?
_________________

kudos me if you like my post.

Attitude determine everything.
all the best and God bless you.

Kudos [?]: 85 [0], given: 44

Intern
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Posts: 8

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

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2010, 12:33
321kumarsushant wrote:
can anyone please explain why C is not a correct option??
i am agree with C.
E doesn't make sense to me.
can any one tell me, where can i find the correct solution of this question apart from this discussion.?

321kumarsushant:
Option C says that when Frobisher examined the soil sample for gold he used a different method than anyone else was using back in the 1500s . Even if this is true, this statement does not affect the conclusion at all.
If choice C said "The methods used to assess gold content of the soil samples provided by Frobisher were different from those generally used in the twenty first century.", then it would be a contender for the correct answer.
Hope that helps.

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

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7604

Kudos [?]: 16871 [11], given: 230

Location: Pune, India

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2010, 21:31
11
KUDOS
Expert's post
10
This post was
BOOKMARKED
fiesta wrote:
Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.

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

(A) The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century.
(B) The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island.
(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.
(D) Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content.
(E) Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.

Let us read the question stem first. We are looking for an assumption. An assumption is a necessary missing premise. We are looking for the option that needs to be true for the conclusion to be true.

Premises:
Frobisher had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content.
Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions.
Neither expedition found any gold there.
Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content.

Tell me, when you read the above premises, what possibilities come to mind? Frobisher had samples examined. High gold content was reported. No gold was actually found. Modern analysis show very low gold content.

The following possibilities come to my mind:
1. Either there was gold and before the expeditions were sent, it was mined (very unlikely!)
2. His methods were inaccurate.

Conclusion:
The methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate.

If I am concluding that his methods were inaccurate, then I am assuming that no one added gold to his samples and gold was not mined before the expeditions were sent. (Technically, gold could have been added and his methods could have been inaccurate too but lets not mess with that.)
Hence option (E) is an assumption.
Also, use you can use assumption negation technique to see that it is the right answer.
I negate (E) : Gold was added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.

I can not conclude now that his methods were inaccurate.
Hence (E) is the correct answer.

Option (C) is not correct. We did not assume in the argument that his methods were different. They could have been the same ones generally used in the 16th century, It is possible that 16th century methods were not accurate.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 16871 [11], given: 230

Re: Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from   [#permalink] 26 Nov 2010, 21:31

Go to page    1   2   3   4    Next  [ 72 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
7 When soil is plowed in the spring, pigweed seeds that have 12 30 Jul 2017, 01:42
36 Rye sown in the fall and plowed into the soil in early 30 08 Sep 2017, 21:45
1 From 2004 to 2005, Unlimited Postal Service had the highest 11 08 Apr 2017, 08:49
6 From June through August 1987, Premiere Airlines had the 13 11 Jul 2017, 00:41
Samples from the floor of a rock shelter in Pennsylvania 5 04 Jul 2012, 02:45
Display posts from previous: Sort by