It is currently 11 Dec 2017, 02:35

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Top Contributor
9 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Status: I don't stop when I'm Tired,I stop when I'm done
Joined: 11 May 2014
Posts: 563

Kudos [?]: 3036 [9], given: 220

Location: Bangladesh
Concentration: Finance, Leadership
GPA: 2.81
WE: Business Development (Real Estate)
In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jul 2016, 03:13
9
This post received
KUDOS
Top Contributor
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Question 1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Question Stats:

57% (02:29) correct 43% (02:49) wrong based on 651

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 2
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Question Stats:

84% (00:40) correct 16% (00:54) wrong based on 616

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 3
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Question Stats:

77% (00:32) correct 23% (00:53) wrong based on 623

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 4
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Question Stats:

67% (00:44) correct 33% (01:02) wrong based on 622

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 5
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Question Stats:

79% (00:55) correct 21% (00:50) wrong based on 600

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 6
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Question Stats:

23% (01:50) correct 77% (02:43) wrong based on 615

HideShow timer Statistics

OG V 2017 New RC
Line
    In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in
    the short term by identifying precursory phenomena
    (those that occur a few days before large quakes
    but not otherwise) turned their attention to changes
(5)
    in seismic waves that had been detected prior to
    earthquakes. An explanation for such changes was
    offered by “dilatancy theory,” based on a well-known
    phenomenon observed in rocks in the laboratory:
    as stress builds, microfractures in rock close,
(10)
    decreasing the rock’s volume. But as stress
    continues to increase, the rock begins to crack and
    expand in volume, allowing groundwater to seep in,
    weakening the rock. According to this theory, such
    effects could lead to several precursory phenomena in
(15)
    the field, including a change in the velocity of seismic
    waves, and an increase in small, nearby tremors.
    Researchers initially reported success in identifying
    these possible precursors, but subsequent analyses
    of their data proved disheartening. Seismic waves
(20)
    with unusual velocities were recorded before some
    earthquakes, but while the historical record confirms
    that most large earthquakes are preceded by minor
    tremors, these foreshocks indicate nothing about
    the magnitude of an impending quake and are
(25)
    indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur
    without large earthquakes.
    In the 1980s, some researchers turned their
    efforts from short-term to long-term prediction.
    Noting that earthquakes tend to occur repeatedly in
(30)
    certain regions, Lindh and Baker attempted to identify
    patterns of recurrence, or earthquake cycles, on which
    to base predictions. In a study of earthquake-prone
    sites along the San Andreas Fault, they determined
    that quakes occurred at intervals of approximately 22
(35)
    years near one site and concluded that there was a
    95 percent probability of an earthquake in that area
    by 1992. The earthquake did not occur within the time
    frame predicted, however.
    Evidence against the kind of regular
(40)
    earthquake cycles that Lindh and Baker tried
    to establish has come from a relatively new
    field, paleoseismology. Paleoseismologists
    have unearthed and dated geological features
    such as fault scarps that were caused by
(45)
    earthquakes thousands of years ago. They have
    determined that the average interval between ten
    earthquakes that took place at one site along the
    San Andreas Fault in the past two millennia was
    132 years, but individual intervals ranged greatly,
(50)
    from 44 to 332 years.
(Book Question: 11)
The passage is primarily concerned with

A. explaining why one method of earthquake prediction has proven more practicable than an alternative method
B. suggesting that accurate earthquake forecasting must combine elements of long-term and short-term prediction
C. challenging the usefulness of dilatancy theory for explaining the occurrence of precursory phenomena
D. discussing the deficiency of two methods by which researchers have attempted to predict the occurrence of earthquakes
E. describing the development of methods for establishing patterns in the occurrence of past earthquakes

[Reveal] Spoiler:
D


(Book Question: 12)
According to the passage, laboratory evidence concerning the effects of stress on rocks might help account for

A. differences in magnitude among earthquakes
B. certain phenomena that occur prior to earthquakes
C. variations in the intervals between earthquakes in a particular area
D. differences in the frequency with which earthquakes occur in various areas
E. the unreliability of short-term earthquake predictions

[Reveal] Spoiler:
B


(Book Question: 13)
It can be inferred from the passage that one problem with using precursory phenomena to predict earthquakes is that minor tremors

A. typically occur some distance from the sites of the large earthquakes that follow them
B. are directly linked to the mechanisms that cause earthquakes
C. are difficult to distinguish from major tremors
D. have proven difficult to measure accurately
E. are not always followed by large earthquakes

[Reveal] Spoiler:
E


(Book Question: 14)
According to the passage, some researchers based their research about long-term earthquake prediction on which of the following facts?

A. The historical record confirms that most earthquakes have been preceded by minor tremors.
B. The average interval between earthquakes in one region of the San Andreas Fault is 132 years.
C. Some regions tend to be the site of numerous earthquakes over the course of many years.
D. Changes in the volume of rock can occur as a result of building stress and can lead to the weakening of rock.
E. Paleoseismologists have been able to unearth and date geological features caused by past earthquakes.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
C


(Book Question: 15)
The passage suggests which of the following about the paleoseismologists’ findings described in lines 42–50?

A. They suggest that the frequency with which earthquakes occurred at a particular site decreased significantly over the past two millennia.
B. They suggest that paleoseismologists may someday be able to make reasonably accurate long-term earthquake predictions.
C. They suggest that researchers may someday be able to determine which past occurrences of minor tremors were actually followed by large earthquakes.
D. They suggest that the recurrence of earthquakes in earthquake-prone sites is too irregular to serve as a basis for earthquake prediction.
E. They indicate that researchers attempting to develop long-term methods of earthquake prediction have overlooked important evidence concerning the causes of earthquakes.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
D


(Book Question: 16)
The author implies which of the following about the ability of the researchers mentioned in line 18 to predict earthquakes?

A. They can identify when an earthquake is likely to occur but not how large it will be.
B. They can identify the regions where earthquakes are likely to occur but not when they will occur.
C. They are unable to determine either the time or the place that earthquakes are likely to occur.
D. They are likely to be more accurate at short-term earthquake prediction than at long-term earthquake prediction.
E. They can determine the regions where earthquakes have occurred in the past but not the regions where they are likely to occur in the future.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
C

[Reveal] Spoiler: Question #1 OA
[Reveal] Spoiler: Question #2 OA
[Reveal] Spoiler: Question #3 OA
[Reveal] Spoiler: Question #4 OA
[Reveal] Spoiler: Question #5 OA
[Reveal] Spoiler: Question #6 OA

_________________

Md. Abdur Rakib

Please Press +1 Kudos,If it helps
Sentence Correction-Collection of Ron Purewal's "elliptical construction/analogies" for SC Challenges

Kudos [?]: 3036 [9], given: 220

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 13 Jun 2016
Posts: 134

Kudos [?]: 135 [0], given: 424

Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Technology
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 31 Jul 2016, 12:26
Can someone explain why the primarily purpose is D and not E? I thought it was more about the development of methods rather than the shortcomings of methods.

Kudos [?]: 135 [0], given: 424

1 KUDOS received
SC Moderator
User avatar
P
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Posts: 1507

Kudos [?]: 1220 [1], given: 895

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Aug 2016, 10:21
1
This post received
KUDOS
alpham wrote:
Can someone explain why the primarily purpose is D and not E? I thought it was more about the development of methods rather than the shortcomings of methods.


The passage discusses two methods for predicting earthquakes and suggests that both the methods are not accurate - Answer has to be D.

Now lets look at why E is wrong:
E. describing the development of methods for establishing patterns in the occurrence of past earthquakes - Are the two methods limited to establishing patterns of past earthquakes? No. Moreover development of methods is a positive tone. But the passage is not too optimistic about the methods suggested. E cannot be the answer.

Kudos [?]: 1220 [1], given: 895

1 KUDOS received
SC Moderator
User avatar
P
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Posts: 1507

Kudos [?]: 1220 [1], given: 895

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Aug 2016, 10:29
1
This post received
KUDOS
smartyman wrote:
Please provide OE for Q16. Thanks.


Line 18: Researchers initially reported success in identifying these possible precursors, but subsequent analyses of their data proved disheartening.

The author implies which of the following about the ability of the researchers mentioned in line 18 to predict earthquakes?

A. They can identify when an earthquake is likely to occur but not how large it will be. - Incorrect.
B. They can identify the regions where earthquakes are likely to occur but not when they will occur. - Incorrect.
C. They are unable to determine either the time or the place that earthquakes are likely to occur. - Correct
D. They are likely to be more accurate at short-term earthquake prediction than at long-term earthquake prediction. -Incorrect
E. They can determine the regions where earthquakes have occurred in the past but not the regions where they are likely to occur in the future. - Incorrect

Answer: C

Kudos [?]: 1220 [1], given: 895

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 27 Jul 2011
Posts: 61

Kudos [?]: 77 [0], given: 15

Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2016, 07:38
Dear Vyshak,

I am able to locate the part in which it states the time (paragraph 1 in parenthesis) but I am unable to locate the part in which it states the place as precursor. Could you please point me to the right direction. Thanks.

Kudos [?]: 77 [0], given: 15

SC Moderator
User avatar
P
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Posts: 1507

Kudos [?]: 1220 [0], given: 895

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2016, 09:35
smartyman wrote:
Dear Vyshak,

I am able to locate the part in which it states the time (paragraph 1 in parenthesis) but I am unable to locate the part in which it states the place as precursor. Could you please point me to the right direction. Thanks.


I am not able to understand your question. Can you please be clear on what exactly you want me to explain?

Kudos [?]: 1220 [0], given: 895

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 27 Jul 2011
Posts: 61

Kudos [?]: 77 [0], given: 15

Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Aug 2016, 09:38
Dear Vyshak,
In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by identifying precursory phenomena (those that occur a few days before large quakes but not otherwise) turned their attention to changes in seismic waves that had been detected prior to earthquakes.
Researchers initially reported success in identifying these possible precursors, but subsequent analyses of their data proved disheartening.

Based on these 2 statements:
since subsequent analyses of their data proved disheartening, researchers initially identification of precursor phenomena (those that occur a few days {TIME} before quakes but not otherwise) could be flawed. But the whole passage did not mention that researchers are unable to pinpoint the location of quakes that are likely to occur.

The answer C: They are unable to determine either the time or the place that earthquakes are likely to occur.

Kudos [?]: 77 [0], given: 15

SC Moderator
User avatar
P
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Posts: 1507

Kudos [?]: 1220 [0], given: 895

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Aug 2016, 10:56
smartyman wrote:
Dear Vyshak,
In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by identifying precursory phenomena (those that occur a few days before large quakes but not otherwise) turned their attention to changes in seismic waves that had been detected prior to earthquakes.
Researchers initially reported success in identifying these possible precursors, but subsequent analyses of their data proved disheartening.

Based on these 2 statements:
since subsequent analyses of their data proved disheartening, researchers initially identification of precursor phenomena (those that occur a few days {TIME} before quakes but not otherwise) could be flawed. But the whole passage did not mention that researchers are unable to pinpoint the location of quakes that are likely to occur.

The answer C: They are unable to determine either the time or the place that earthquakes are likely to occur.


Hi smartyman,

The researchers thought they were successful, but the end result was contrary to what they thought. The premise provides the context, but the conclusion matters the most. And if you read the passage carefully, the whole passage explains the shortcomings of the two methods used to predict earthquakes. They researchers were neither able to predict a place nor the time of earthquakes. The answer can also be obtained through elimination of other choices.

Kudos [?]: 1220 [0], given: 895

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 27 May 2016
Posts: 11

Kudos [?]: 1 [1], given: 208

CAT Tests
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2016, 07:58
1
This post received
KUDOS
Vyshak wrote:
smartyman wrote:
Dear Vyshak,
In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by identifying precursory phenomena (those that occur a few days before large quakes but not otherwise) turned their attention to changes in seismic waves that had been detected prior to earthquakes.
Researchers initially reported success in identifying these possible precursors, but subsequent analyses of their data proved disheartening.

Based on these 2 statements:
since subsequent analyses of their data proved disheartening, researchers initially identification of precursor phenomena (those that occur a few days {TIME} before quakes but not otherwise) could be flawed. But the whole passage did not mention that researchers are unable to pinpoint the location of quakes that are likely to occur.

The answer C: They are unable to determine either the time or the place that earthquakes are likely to occur.


Hi smartyman,

The researchers thought they were successful, but the end result was contrary to what they thought. The premise provides the context, but the conclusion matters the most. And if you read the passage carefully, the whole passage explains the shortcomings of the two methods used to predict earthquakes. They researchers were neither able to predict a place nor the time of earthquakes. The answer can also be obtained through elimination of other choices.




Researchers initially reported success in identifying
these possible precursors, but subsequent analyses
of their data proved disheartening. Seismic waves

with unusual velocities were recorded before some
earthquakes, but while the historical record confirms
that most large earthquakes are preceded by minor
tremors, these foreshocks indicate nothing about
the magnitude of an impending quake and are

From this statement I marked A as the answer , my line of reasoning is Researchers were not able to find what the shocks meant as the shocks were misleading, they could either indicate a minor or a major earthquake

Kudos [?]: 1 [1], given: 208

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 29 Nov 2016
Posts: 10

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 141

Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Mar 2017, 09:04
In the last question, I'm unable to understand why C is correct and A is wrong.

First of all, this is an inference question, right? Because OG has put it under the 'supporting idea' category and the explanation also reads "The question asks for information explicitly stated..."

Secondly, the passage states the foreshocks are indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur without large earthquakes. At a stretch, it could mean that they are unsure of the time. But how can they be unsure of the place? The tremors are 'nearby' as stated in the passage.

Answer choice A, on the other hand, is very easily inferable by the line 'these foreshocks indicate nothing about the magnitude of an impending quake'.

Also, if someone can explain the answer choices A & C as provided by the OG. Thanks!

Posted from my mobile device

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 141

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 26 Mar 2017
Posts: 161

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 1

Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Apr 2017, 22:15
16 is ridiculous

it says that seismic waves were recorded before some earthquakes, but while the historical record confirms that most large earthquakes are preceded by minor tremors, these foreshocks indicate nothing about the magnitude of an impeding quake and are indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur without large earthquakes.


So it should be A not C.... must be a mistake :| :? :roll:
_________________

I hate long and complicated explanations!

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 1

6 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 01 Apr 2017
Posts: 31

Kudos [?]: 18 [6], given: 7

Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Apr 2017, 00:33
6
This post received
KUDOS
hannahkagalwala wrote:
In the last question, I'm unable to understand why C is correct and A is wrong.

First of all, this is an inference question, right? Because OG has put it under the 'supporting idea' category and the explanation also reads "The question asks for information explicitly stated..."

Quote:
Also, if someone can explain the answer choices A & C as provided by the OG. Thanks!


Hey hannahkagalwala,

It is indeed an inference question, albeit detail oriented, since the question stem clearly asks us to look for an implication of the information given in a particular section of the passage.

Now let's look at choice A:

A. They (1) can identify when an earthquake is likely to occur but (2) not how large it will be.

So, choice A talks about the two things:

1. can identify when an earthquake is likely to occur : Passage states, and I quote, " are indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur
without large earthquakes
. Basically, this information tells us that yes tremors do happen but the kind of tremors that are followed by earthquakes are not different from the kind of tremors that are NOT followed by earthquakes. Accordingly, if such tremors happen without a resulting earthquake, then the researchers cannot really tell us whether an earthquake is due.

2. not how large it will be. This can be directly understood from this section of the passage "nothing[/b] about the magnitude of an impending quake.

Therefore, since one part can be inferred and one cannot be, this choice is incorrect.

Now, let's take a look at Choice C.

C. They are unable to determine either the time or the place that earthquakes are likely to occur.

When I read this choice initially, the "place" aspect did throw me off a little-bit, but after reading the information one more time and looking at the other answer choices, I went along with Choice C. So, here are my cents on it:

Quote:
Secondly, the passage states the foreshocks are indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur without large earthquakes. At a stretch, it could mean that they are unsure of the time.


1. unable to determine either the time - This portion, as you agree to an extent, is correct for the reasons explained above (refer to point no. 1 under the explanation for choice A for more detail).

Quote:
But how can they be unsure of the place? The tremors are 'nearby' as stated in the passage.

2. place that earthquakes are likely to occur - Alright, so let's look at how the whole information about tremors observed "nearby" places is given to us. We are basically told that after stress increases beyond a particular point in the rocks, something happens, leading to tremors and other things in the areas nearby to these rocks. Right? But then we are also told that just because these tremors occur, we cannot predict that an earthquake will follow. So, when you combine these two pieces of information, it means that say at place xyz, the researchers observe tremors, but they can't really say that at this place, there will be an earthquake. This is why the whole "place" angle makes sense - even though one is not very comfortable with it in the beginning.

Hope the above explanation helps.

Cheers! :)

Kudos [?]: 18 [6], given: 7

Retired Moderator
avatar
P
Joined: 12 Aug 2015
Posts: 2209

Kudos [?]: 898 [0], given: 607

GRE 1: 323 Q169 V154
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Apr 2017, 20:08
Hi Expert

I have a query regarding the last question in this series.
We are asked about the ability of the researchers in the line 18.
The passage clearly indicates and even mentions -> They were able to predict the timing but not the magnitude." indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur"

I am still convinced that the OA should be A.

What am i missing.?

P.S-> I have seen the other replies.
without large earthquakes.


Regards
Stone Cold
_________________

Give me a hell yeah ...!!!!!

Kudos [?]: 898 [0], given: 607

Expert Post
5 KUDOS received
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
B
Joined: 20 Nov 2016
Posts: 201

Kudos [?]: 104 [5], given: 51

CAT Tests
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Apr 2017, 19:16
5
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
Hi stonecold, good question!

Quote:
I have a query regarding the last question in this series.
We are asked about the ability of the researchers in the line 18.
The passage clearly indicates and even mentions -> They were able to predict the timing but not the magnitude." indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur"

I am still convinced that the OA should be A.

What am i missing.?

P.S-> I have seen the other replies.
without large earthquakes.


Imagine that the researchers recorded 100 large earthquakes of various magnitudes during their study and that nearly all of those large earthquakes were preceded by minor tremors. This might lead us to expect any minor tremor to be followed by a large earthquake, even though we might not know exactly how large that "large" earthquake will be. Thus, choice A is tempting.

Now consider the final fact given in line 23: "these foreshocks... are indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur without large earthquakes." If instead the passage stated, "these foreshocks are indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur before small earthquakes", THEN choice A would be defensible... this would imply that after a minor tremor we can expect an earthquake, though we have no idea how small or large it will be. But the passage states that the tremors are "indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur without large earthquakes." Therefore, the passage implies that a minor tremor could be followed by a large earthquake, a small earthquake, or no earthquake at all; for example, the researchers may have recorded HUNDREDS of minor tremors that were NOT followed by an earthquake.

This explanation is supported by the first sentence starting in line 17: "Researchers initially reported success in identifying these possible precursors, but subsequent analyses of their data proved disheartening." In other words, the researchers were initially successful in identifying earthquake precursors; subsequent analyses proved disheartening, implying that the researchers were not successful in identifying precursors that would predict earthquakes.

I hope that helps!
_________________

www.gmatninja.com

Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail | RSS

Kudos [?]: 104 [5], given: 51

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 21 Aug 2016
Posts: 299

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 136

Location: India
GPA: 3.9
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Apr 2017, 07:22
Hi GMATNinjaTwo,

Can you please explain why choice E is incorrect in question 14 (4)?
My reasoning:
Since paleoseismology provides evidence for regular earthquake cycles on which long term prediction is based. That means related theory written in line 45 are facts on which researchers' theory is based.

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 136

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
B
Joined: 20 Nov 2016
Posts: 201

Kudos [?]: 104 [1], given: 51

CAT Tests
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Apr 2017, 16:01
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
AR15J,

Quote:
Can you please explain why choice E is incorrect in question 14 (4)?
My reasoning:
Since paleoseismology provides evidence for regular earthquake cycles on which long term prediction is based. That means related theory written in line 45 are facts on which researchers' theory is based.


Referring to line 45, the paleoseismologists "have determined that the average interval between ten earthquakes that took place at one site along the San Andreas Fault in the past two millennia was 132 years, but individual intervals ranged greatly, from 44 to 332 years." This evidence does not suggest that earthquakes occur at regular intervals because the intervals ranged greatly (from 44 to 332 years); in fact, this is evidence against the existence of regular earthquake cycles that could, if they existed, be used in long-term earthquake prediction. If the intervals did not vary greatly (ie if the standard deviation was lower and the interval between most of those earthquakes was very close to the average of 132 years, then this would suggest that earthquakes in that region occur at regular intervals).

Furthermore, the question is asking us to select a fact on which some researchers based their research. Choice E describes data collected by paleoseismologists while conducting their research; thus, choice E describes the research itself, not a fact on which the research was based. Choice C, on the other hand, describes a fact on which some researchers based their research (see line 29: "Noting that earthquakes tend to occur repeatedly in certain regions, Lindh and Baker attempted to identify patterns of recurrence, or earthquake cycles, on which to base predictions."). In other words, Lindh and Baker noted the fact that "some regions tend to be the site of numerous earthquakes over the course of many years," so they began to study those regions to see if they could identify patterns of recurrence on which to base long-term earthquake prediction.
_________________

www.gmatninja.com

Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail | RSS

Kudos [?]: 104 [1], given: 51

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 01 Apr 2017
Posts: 31

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 7

Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Apr 2017, 21:55
anje29 wrote:
Please specify the source of this passage .


It's Verbal Review 2017 - passage on page number 26.


Cheers! :)

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 7

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 19 Jan 2016
Posts: 51

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

Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Aug 2017, 12:09
Can some one explain question 13 ? I cant distinguish between C and E !! Ended up picking C

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

VP
VP
User avatar
G
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1088

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 562

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: 314 Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
CAT Tests
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Aug 2017, 00:36
Hi Experts
Please explain the answer of the last question ?
_________________

We are more often frightened than hurt; and we suffer more from imagination than from reality

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 562

1 KUDOS received
Board of Directors
User avatar
D
Status: Aiming MBA
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 2839

Kudos [?]: 958 [1], given: 69

Location: India
Concentration: Healthcare, Technology
GPA: 3.65
WE: Information Technology (Health Care)
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Aug 2017, 03:07
1
This post received
KUDOS
arvind910619 wrote:
Hi Experts
Please explain the answer of the last question ?


Hi arvind910619 ,

Let me help you. :)

Last question is talking about the ability of the researchers mentioned in line 18.

To answer this question, you must understand the following lines:

"Researchers initially reported success in identifying these possible precursors, but subsequent analyses of their data proved disheartening. Seismic waves with unusual velocities were recorded before some earthquakes, but while the historical record confirms that most large earthquakes are preceded by minor tremors, these foreshocks indicate nothing about the magnitude of an impending quake and are indistinguishable from other minor tremors that occur without large earthquakes."

These lines say they tried recording the Seismic waves of certain regions with the hope that they will determine the place and the time of earthquake occurrence but later they found that we have some places where we can see similar kind of seismic waves but no earth quake is present.

This means what they were thinking is the right approach came out to be irrelevant for them.

Thus, option C is correct. "They are unable to determine either the time or the place that earthquakes are likely to occur."

Let me talk about other options now:

A. They can identify when an earthquake is likely to occur but not how large it will be. --> No where we are given this. As per the meaning, their method was wrong. Hence, they were not able to identify the places or time.

B. They can identify the regions where earthquakes are likely to occur but not when they will occur. --> Same as above. They cannot identify the regions.

C. They are unable to determine either the time or the place that earthquakes are likely to occur.


D. They are likely to be more accurate at short-term earthquake prediction than at long-term earthquake prediction. --> This is not given for these researchers.

E. They can determine the regions where earthquakes have occurred in the past but not the regions where they are likely to occur in the future. --> Again, this is not given

Does that make sense?
_________________

How I improved from V21 to V40! ?

Kudos [?]: 958 [1], given: 69

Re: In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by   [#permalink] 13 Aug 2017, 03:07

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 26 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In 1971 researchers hoping to predict earthquakes in the short term by

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


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| 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®.