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.
Mar 2709:30 AM PDT
-10:30 AM PDT
Preparing for the GMAT? Avoid these 5 major mistakes that can lower your score and hurt your MBA dreams. In this expert panel discussion, 4 top GMAT coaches - GMAT Ninja, Jeff Miller from TTP, Rida Shafiq from eGMAT, and Chris Gentry from Manhattan Prep- Mar 27
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
What happens after getting an MBA? Is it worth the investment? To find out, I interviewed 10 GMAT Club professionals who have completed their MBAs and built careers in consulting, finance, tech, and entrepreneurship. Their answers might surprise you! 
Mar 2911:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Mar 3005:30 AM PDT
-07:30 AM PDT
We know Strengthen and Weaken questions account for more than 50% of the CR questions on the GMAT. With CR becoming even more important on GMAT Focus, it's time you strengthen your weaknesses with an approach that improves your solving time and accuracy!
Mar 3011:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to evaluate your current skill level, learn process skills, and solve through tough Arithmetic questions.
Mar 3110:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
The Target Test Prep team has recently introduced TTP OnDemand GMAT, a 400-hour live masterclass video course created by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder and CEO of Target Test Prep.
Marco: Giant kangaroos became extinct during a period that was less arid than previous periods they endured.
Fatima: Many researchers believe humans first arrived in Australia around 40,000 years ago.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
37% (02:42) correct
63%
(02:58)
wrong
based on 1378
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Marco: Giant kangaroos—one of several extinct species of large mammals (megafauna)—went extinct in Australia around 46,000 years ago. The deposits and wear patterns on the teeth of these animals from around the time of their extinction indicate that they fed mostly on saltbrush shrubs. Saltbrush thrives in arid climates, so it is not likely that the kangaroos’ food supply was adversely affected by the increasing aridity of the climate at the time. Thus, something else would have to account for their extinction, and the best candidate for that cause is predation by humans.
Fatima: That argument alone is not likely to satisfy many researchers in this field. Have you found any other evidence to bolster your conclusion?
Select Marco for the statement that, if true, most justifies Marco’s assertions, and select Fatima for the statement that, if true, most justifies Fatima’s skepticism about Marco’s assertions. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Fatima: That argument alone is not likely to satisfy many researchers in this field. Have you found any other evidence to bolster your conclusion?
Select Marco for the statement that, if true, most justifies Marco’s assertions, and select Fatima for the statement that, if true, most justifies Fatima’s skepticism about Marco’s assertions. Make only two selections, one in each column.
ID: 100371
| Marco | Fatima | |
| Giant kangaroos became extinct during a period that was less arid than previous periods they endured. | ||
| Many researchers believe humans first arrived in Australia around 40,000 years ago. | ||
| Approximately 60 different species in Australia died out in the wave of extinctions around 46,000 years ago. | ||
| Fossils of giant kangaroos also show evidence that those animals' diets routinely included plants other than saltbrush. | ||
| Several types of megafauna larger than the giant kangaroo went extinct around 46,000 years ago. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Marco: Giant kangaroos became extinct during a period that was less arid than previous periods they endured.
Fatima: Many researchers believe humans first arrived in Australia around 40,000 years ago.
07 Dec 2020, 11:12
Kudos
Bookmarks
How is A true for Marco?
it actually undermines Marco's argument.
1. Marco says Kangaroos fed mainly on shrubs. 2. Shrubs feel fine when climate is arid. 3. Climate was getting more arid when GK went extinct.
Option A says THE OPPOSITE: the climate was getting LESS arid at the time kangaroos went extinct.
This totally ruins Marco's point. It might mean, shrubs became less available during that time, and the GK actually died out from hunger.
I'd like to hear your thoughts!
it actually undermines Marco's argument.
1. Marco says Kangaroos fed mainly on shrubs. 2. Shrubs feel fine when climate is arid. 3. Climate was getting more arid when GK went extinct.
Option A says THE OPPOSITE: the climate was getting LESS arid at the time kangaroos went extinct.
This totally ruins Marco's point. It might mean, shrubs became less available during that time, and the GK actually died out from hunger.
I'd like to hear your thoughts!
aliakberza
Hi aakash214. Thanks for posting this here.
I came across this question on GMAT Prep took and took a long time struggling with it before figuring it out. It is definitely one of the harder ones I have come across!
Firstly let's list down what each of them is saying:
So Marco lists down a bunch of facts about GKs, their habitats and the climate of the time they lived and concludes that increasing aridity of the time means that external factors such as humans were responsible for GK's extinction. Fatima is largely skeptical of the tall claims and asks for more evidence.
Questions asks: Select Marco for the statement that, if true, most justifies Marco’s assertions, and select Fatima, for the statement that, if true, most justifies Fatima’s skepticism about Marco’s assertions. Make only two selections, one in each column.
So we are looking for facts that SUPPORT Marco's and Fatima's assertions (one option each), choices are:
You will see that once you rule out the improbable and unrelated choices only A and B match with Marco's and Fatima's assertions respectively.
Hope this helps. I can't say for sure but this seems like one of the harder IR Qs. I got it wrong too when I was taking the practice test myself.
I came across this question on GMAT Prep took and took a long time struggling with it before figuring it out. It is definitely one of the harder ones I have come across!
Firstly let's list down what each of them is saying:
Quote:
Marco: Giant kangaroos - one of several extinct species of large mammals (megafauna) - went extinct around 46,000 years ago. The deposits and wear patterns on the teeth of these animals from around the time of their extinction indicate that they fed mostly on saltbrush shrubs. Saltbrush thrives in arid climates, so it is not likely that the kangaroos' food supply was adversely affected by the increasing aridity of the climate at that time. Thus, something else would have to account for their extinction, and the best candidate for that cause is predation by humans.
- GKs are one of many species of large mammals
- Went extinct 46,000 years ago
- Evidence from from teeth show they fed mostly on saltbrush
- Saltbrush thrives in arid climates
- We know climate was becoming more arid at the time
- The aridity will help heir main food thrive
- The aridity should in fact help the species thrive, because their main food source will thrive NOT make them extinct
- Hence if it wasn't the climate it HAD to be something else and humans are the most likely.
Quote:
Fatima: That argument alone is not likely to satisfy many researchers in this field. Have you found any other evidence to bolster your conclusion ?
- This argument alone is not enough to convince researchers of your conclusion
- Is there any other evidence you have to support your claim?
So Marco lists down a bunch of facts about GKs, their habitats and the climate of the time they lived and concludes that increasing aridity of the time means that external factors such as humans were responsible for GK's extinction. Fatima is largely skeptical of the tall claims and asks for more evidence.
Questions asks: Select Marco for the statement that, if true, most justifies Marco’s assertions, and select Fatima, for the statement that, if true, most justifies Fatima’s skepticism about Marco’s assertions. Make only two selections, one in each column.
So we are looking for facts that SUPPORT Marco's and Fatima's assertions (one option each), choices are:
Quote:
A) Giant kangaroos became extinct during a period that was less arid than previous periods they endured.
Yes! Marco does note that the climate, at the time the GKs went extinct, was becoming increasingly arid and dry. It was not the main crux of the arguement but was part of the evidence used to support the conclusion for sure. Lets hold on to this for now as a candidate supporting Marco's assertion.Quote:
B)Many researchers believe humans first arrived in Australia around 40,000 years ago.
This is a perfect candidate for a fact that supports Fatima's skepticism, if humans arrived only 40 thousand years ago they could not possibly have been the cause of GK extinction 46 thousand years ago! Seems like a good match for Fatima! Quote:
C)Approximately 60 different species in Australia died out in the wave of extinctions around 46,000 years ago.
Does not help support either of the people's arguments.Quote:
D)Fossils of giant kangaroos also show evidence that those animals' diets routinely included plants other than saltbrush.
This is actually irrelevant to what Marco has to say, simply because Marco says that their main diet saltbrush was in ample supply and only becoming more widely available due to the increasing aridity of the climate. If GKs did indeed eat something else as well, it really does not support Marco because he has already concluded based on available evidence that their main food source was in ample supply. Quote:
E)Several types of megafauna larger than the giant kangaroo went extinct around 46,000 years ago.
Extinction of other larger megafauna are not relevant to either of their discussions.You will see that once you rule out the improbable and unrelated choices only A and B match with Marco's and Fatima's assertions respectively.
Hope this helps. I can't say for sure but this seems like one of the harder IR Qs. I got it wrong too when I was taking the practice test myself.
30 Aug 2019, 13:20
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi aakash214. Thanks for posting this here.
I came across this question on GMAT Prep took and took a long time struggling with it before figuring it out. It is definitely one of the harder ones I have come across!
Firstly let's list down what each of them is saying:
So Marco lists down a bunch of facts about GKs, their habitats and the climate of the time they lived and concludes that increasing aridity of the time means that external factors such as humans were responsible for GK's extinction. Fatima is largely skeptical of the tall claims and asks for more evidence.
Questions asks: Select Marco for the statement that, if true, most justifies Marco’s assertions, and select Fatima, for the statement that, if true, most justifies Fatima’s skepticism about Marco’s assertions. Make only two selections, one in each column.
So we are looking for facts that SUPPORT Marco's and Fatima's assertions (one option each), choices are:
You will see that once you rule out the improbable and unrelated choices only A and B match with Marco's and Fatima's assertions respectively.
Hope this helps. I can't say for sure but this seems like one of the harder IR Qs. I got it wrong too when I was taking the practice test myself.
I came across this question on GMAT Prep took and took a long time struggling with it before figuring it out. It is definitely one of the harder ones I have come across!
Firstly let's list down what each of them is saying:
Quote:
Marco: Giant kangaroos - one of several extinct species of large mammals (megafauna) - went extinct around 46,000 years ago. The deposits and wear patterns on the teeth of these animals from around the time of their extinction indicate that they fed mostly on saltbrush shrubs. Saltbrush thrives in arid climates, so it is not likely that the kangaroos' food supply was adversely affected by the increasing aridity of the climate at that time. Thus, something else would have to account for their extinction, and the best candidate for that cause is predation by humans.
- GKs are one of many species of large mammals
- Went extinct 46,000 years ago
- Evidence from from teeth show they fed mostly on saltbrush
- Saltbrush thrives in arid climates
- We know climate was becoming more arid at the time
- The aridity will help heir main food thrive
- The aridity should in fact help the species thrive, because their main food source will thrive NOT make them extinct
- Hence if it wasn't the climate it HAD to be something else and humans are the most likely.
Quote:
Fatima: That argument alone is not likely to satisfy many researchers in this field. Have you found any other evidence to bolster your conclusion ?
- This argument alone is not enough to convince researchers of your conclusion
- Is there any other evidence you have to support your claim?
So Marco lists down a bunch of facts about GKs, their habitats and the climate of the time they lived and concludes that increasing aridity of the time means that external factors such as humans were responsible for GK's extinction. Fatima is largely skeptical of the tall claims and asks for more evidence.
Questions asks: Select Marco for the statement that, if true, most justifies Marco’s assertions, and select Fatima, for the statement that, if true, most justifies Fatima’s skepticism about Marco’s assertions. Make only two selections, one in each column.
So we are looking for facts that SUPPORT Marco's and Fatima's assertions (one option each), choices are:
Quote:
A) Giant kangaroos became extinct during a period that was less arid than previous periods they endured.
Yes! Marco does note that the climate, at the time the GKs went extinct, was becoming increasingly arid and dry. It was not the main crux of the arguement but was part of the evidence used to support the conclusion for sure. Lets hold on to this for now as a candidate supporting Marco's assertion.Quote:
B)Many researchers believe humans first arrived in Australia around 40,000 years ago.
This is a perfect candidate for a fact that supports Fatima's skepticism, if humans arrived only 40 thousand years ago they could not possibly have been the cause of GK extinction 46 thousand years ago! Seems like a good match for Fatima! Quote:
C)Approximately 60 different species in Australia died out in the wave of extinctions around 46,000 years ago.
Does not help support either of the people's arguments.Quote:
D)Fossils of giant kangaroos also show evidence that those animals' diets routinely included plants other than saltbrush.
This is actually irrelevant to what Marco has to say, simply because Marco says that their main diet saltbrush was in ample supply and only becoming more widely available due to the increasing aridity of the climate. If GKs did indeed eat something else as well, it really does not support Marco because he has already concluded based on available evidence that their main food source was in ample supply. Quote:
E)Several types of megafauna larger than the giant kangaroo went extinct around 46,000 years ago.
Extinction of other larger megafauna are not relevant to either of their discussions.You will see that once you rule out the improbable and unrelated choices only A and B match with Marco's and Fatima's assertions respectively.
Hope this helps. I can't say for sure but this seems like one of the harder IR Qs. I got it wrong too when I was taking the practice test myself.
:
