It is currently 19 Nov 2017, 23:26

### 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

# Millions of irreplaceable exhibits in natural history

Author Message
Director
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 584

Kudos [?]: 288 [0], given: 0

Millions of irreplaceable exhibits in natural history [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 May 2005, 15:46
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 100% (00:03) wrong based on 2 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

10. Millions of irreplaceable exhibits in natural history museums are currently allowed to decay. Yet without analyses of eggs from museums, the studies linking pesticides with the decline of birds of prey would have been impossible. Therefore, funds must be raised to preserve at least those exhibits that will be most valuable to science in the future.

The argument presupposes that

(A) if a museum exhibit is irreplaceable, its preservation is of an importance that overrides economic considerations
(B) the scientific analysis of museum exhibits can be performed in nondestructive way
(C) eggs of extinct species should be analyzed to increase knowledge of genetic relationships among species
(D) it can be known at this time what data will be of most use to scientific investigators in the future
(E) the decay of organic material in natural history exhibits is natural and cannot be prevented

Kudos [?]: 288 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2005
Posts: 418

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 0

Location: Phoenix

### Show Tags

10 May 2005, 16:52
Both A and D appear true.

A is true - because the argument talks about raising funds to preserve irreplacable exhibits.
B is not true because the argument does not talk about if the exhibits can be used for multiple studies or not.
C is wrong because there's no reference to the study of "genetic relationships" studies.
D is true because it presupposes and applies that just like eggs are valuable in establishing a relationship between decline of birds of pray and pesticides, we can predict and presuppose the exhibits that would be useful for studies in the future and can be preserved now.
E is false - it opposes the basis of contention that with greater funds exhibits can be preserved.

Between A and D, I'd go with D because there's a slight hint that the author stresses on the preservation of not the "irreplacable" exhibits but the ones that would be most valuable to science in the future.
_________________

Who says elephants can't dance?

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 16 Oct 2004
Posts: 42

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

### Show Tags

11 May 2005, 07:50
D) seems correct because

" funds must be raised to preserve at least those exhibits that will be most valuable to science in the future "

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

11 May 2005, 07:50
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Millions of irreplaceable exhibits in natural history

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 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®.