It is currently 24 Nov 2017, 04:50

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on - Q1

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

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1205

Kudos [?]: 847 [4], given: 0

Location: Taiwan
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on - Q1 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Dec 2004, 06:25
4
This post received
KUDOS
29
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

25% (medium)

Question Stats:

71% (01:03) correct 29% (01:15) wrong based on 1418 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

(A) It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars
(B) it fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth
(C) It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth.
(D) It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.
(E) It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.

Note: There are two questions available with the similar stimulus and same first line but different question. The other question (complete the passage) is discussed in: it-is-theoretically-possible-that-bacteria-developed-on-q2-46449.html
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 847 [4], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 25 Oct 2004
Posts: 95

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

### Show Tags

27 Dec 2004, 18:48
I would also pick D. The argument fails to condisder whether all bacteria came from Mars...

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

Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 326

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 0

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2008, 05:47
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.
The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars. irrevelant
B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth. irrevelant
C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth. irrevelant
D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.
The argument reports about 'strains of bacteria from different planets'
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.
It could well be that all the bacteria living on Earth derived from Mars and the bacteria from Earth died out! Correct answer!

Cheers,

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 751

Kudos [?]: 235 [5], given: 8

Location: Oxford
Schools: Oxford'10
Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2008, 06:03
5
This post received
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
prasannar wrote:
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars. The argument says "even ig bacteria did arrive on earth", so this point is irrelevant since we are assuming Mars had bacteria and it got to earth.

B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth. Again, we have to assume that bacteria got transported to earth, since this is the basis of the argument.

C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth. its irrelevant how Martian bacteria got to earth.

D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria. The argument says that martian bacteria that arrived on earth died out. But this choice makes it possible that martian bacteria thrived on earth and didn't die out.

E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out. this is irrelevant since we are trying to find out something that is against it arguement, i.e martian bacteria died out. This statement says nothing about martian bacteria

Kudos [?]: 235 [5], given: 8

CEO
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2945

Kudos [?]: 674 [0], given: 210

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 05:28
I agree with D. Will explain further if its correct. I must say its a nasty one - both E and D do sound plausible.

Kudos [?]: 674 [0], given: 210

Intern
Joined: 07 Apr 2008
Posts: 1

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

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 08:41
I would go with E.

D talks abt spawning of an Earth-version bacteria from the Martian one. In tht case they would have the same biological/DNA/RNA (blah blah ) structure.. E is correct as it explores a possibility of the existence of a pure-Earth-version (born & brought up on earth :D) which would be biologically different from the martian version.

Hence E.. :D

Any counter arguments??

the stigscousin

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

VP
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1434

Kudos [?]: 371 [0], given: 0

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 11:01
E

If e is true, then there were bacteria with different enough in protien structure, it is just that they died out. This means we cant determine if the bacteria are from mars or not. I didt pick d because stem says bacteria on earth exist

prasannar wrote:
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars.

B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth.

C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth.

D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.

E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.

Kudos [?]: 371 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 07 Apr 2008
Posts: 22

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 13:59
A- hmm..
B-irrelevant to arg
C-irrelevant
D-irrelevant
E-hmm..

To summarize&confirm: What is the arg ? "even if the bac arrived frm MArs, they must have died "
LOok at A and E now...E hints that bac developed on earth might hv died !..and bac frm Mars survived ..
possible! Next, A is true as fact but A doesn't weaken the arg ..arg scope is: bac developed on Mars: may or may not but if they did, then they must have died on earth ( given the fact that structurally totally diff bac cant exist) which E negates..

I go with E

I found this a lil tricky!!

prasannar wrote:
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars.

B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth.

C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth.

D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.

E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 1436

Kudos [?]: 196 [0], given: 12

Schools: Chicago Booth '11
Re: CR 30:19/30 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2008, 14:14
E

Argument is making a conclusion that since all earth bacteria are not different enough they couldn't have arose from another planet.

However the argument fails to consider if previous strains of bacteria on earth that were different enough to have arose from another did exist on earth. (but died out which is why they are not around today)

Kudos [?]: 196 [0], given: 12

Director
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 872

Kudos [?]: 861 [1], given: 18

Name: Ronak Amin
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Re: Bacteria from Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2009, 02:32
1
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
D.

Conclusion: Since there is only one type of bacteria on earth, Martian bacteria has died out ( implies that all bacteria on Earth are the ones that originated on Earth )

There might be a possibility that all bacteria on Earth died out and so current strain of bacteria on Earth is the one that came from Mars. D brings out this flaw.

ankur55 wrote:
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.
The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars.
B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth.
C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth.
D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.

Kudos [?]: 861 [1], given: 18

Director
Joined: 03 Jun 2009
Posts: 782

Kudos [?]: 919 [0], given: 56

Location: New Delhi
WE 1: 5.5 yrs in IT
Re: Bacteria from Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2009, 02:40
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
D.

Evidence: All bacteria on earth is from "one source"
Conclusion: bacteria from Mars have died out.

Author seems to have assumed that this "one source" is "earth". Option D directly attacks this assumption, by saying that all the bacteria from earth have died. So this "one source" must be Mars.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 919 [0], given: 56

Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 227

Kudos [?]: 301 [0], given: 25

Re: Bacteria from Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Dec 2009, 06:13
A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars---it doesn’t need to establish when it has been theoretically established
B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth----it has already established it theoretically
C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth. -------------out of scope
D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria. ----------CORRECT. If this were true then the argument would fall apart. As then the sole bacteria currently present could have been originated in Mars. So no distinction is needed.
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.---it has already mentioned that they would have died out.

Kudos [?]: 301 [0], given: 25

Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 317

Kudos [?]: 157 [3], given: 14

Re: Martian bacteria on Earth [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Mar 2010, 16:22
3
This post received
KUDOS
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. Premise However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacteria strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. Counter -premise
So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out. - conclusion

Weaken question - find the choice that weakens the conclusion

A: It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars - no where related to conclusion ,also author says theoretically possible

B: It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth no where related to conclusion ,also author says meteroite
C: It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth -no where related to conclusion

D: It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria - correct ,if the bacteria on earth are arisen from mars bacteria that means mars bacteria did not die

E: It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out
-no where related to conclusion

In weaken questions - look for the answer choices that attack the conclusion
_________________

Always tag your question

Kudos [?]: 157 [3], given: 14

Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2009
Posts: 311

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 44

Re: Martian bacteria on Earth [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2010, 00:33
I think its D.

A: It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars - irrelevant
B: It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth - irrelevant
C: It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth -it isn't necessary to know the mode of transport
D: It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria - if all the bacteria on Earth have been transported from Mars, then they haven't died out. Hence, correct !
E: It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out - irrelevant

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 44

Manager
Status: I am Midnight's Child !
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Posts: 140

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 11

WE 1: Software Design and Development
Re: Martian bacteria on Earth [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2010, 08:43
nifoui wrote:
It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacteria strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticism:
A: It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars
B: It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth
C: It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth
D: It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria
E: It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out

OA =
[Reveal] Spoiler:
D

Answer is D IMO . Reason is that the argument is based on the assumption that bacteria existed on earth prior to the skirmish with meteorites carrying Martian bacteria stains. D significantly weakens the conclusion "even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out" .
_________________

Argument : If you love long trips, you love the GMAT.
Conclusion : GMAT is long journey.

What does the author assume ?
Assumption : A long journey is a long trip.

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 11

Intern
Joined: 13 Feb 2011
Posts: 5

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

Re: Bacteria from Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2011, 01:38
why is e wrong? dont both options d and e imply the same thing?

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

Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Posts: 272

Kudos [?]: 218 [0], given: 13

Concentration: General Management, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: HBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47
Re: Bacteria from Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2011, 22:43
no, they dont. e says that there might have been some bacteria strains which originated in india and died out- but what is that to do with wheteher bacterias came from mars or not- it is actually irrelevant

Kudos [?]: 218 [0], given: 13

Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 122

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 2

It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Feb 2012, 15:14
Question 11: (W) It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out. The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars.
B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth.
C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth.
D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.

Could someone help me with the answer in this one? Also please provide explanation.

thanks
Ravi

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 2

BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 888

Kudos [?]: 735 [0], given: 44

Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Re: It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2012, 00:18
raviram80 wrote:
Question 11: (W) It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out. The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.

I will deeply explain only the correct choice because I'm seating at the office and do not have more time to do so.

First, the conclusion of the argument: If bacteria on Earth from Mars, they must died out.

The premise: Strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time

No two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets.

If we insert choice E in side YES, the bacteria origin from Earth died out, then the bacteria from Mars develop. The conclusion is broken.

In side NO, reversely, the conclusion is secured.
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Kudos [?]: 735 [0], given: 44

Manager
Joined: 07 Dec 2011
Posts: 150

Kudos [?]: 41 [1], given: 31

Location: India
Re: It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2012, 00:56
1
This post received
KUDOS
I go with D.

the contention made by the author is that since all bacteria on earth are not different enough to have arisen from different planets, any bacteria that may have come from mars must have died out. D refutes this by suggesting the possibility that all the bacteria we see today could be from mars and that the bacteria that originated on earth could have died out. Hence D is correct

Problems with others:

A: Unrelated
B: Unrelated
C: Unrelated
E: Even if some strains of bacteria that originated on earth did die out, this does not preclude the martian strains from dying out leaving some strains that originated on Earth. Note that the statement does not say all bacteria that originated from Earth died out, like D does.. which is what we need.

Kudos [?]: 41 [1], given: 31

Re: It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars   [#permalink] 01 Mar 2012, 00:56

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 32 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on - Q1

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

 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®.