GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 22 Jun 2018, 17:52

### 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

# Most geologists believe oil results from chemical

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 312
Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2013, 02:59
Hi,

Let me try and explain.

Answer C tells us that around the world there are lots of places where there are trapped seas and fossils found together. This is exactly the conditions that the opposing argument for oil creation wants.

So it must weaken our argument, which is not what we want. So it is incorrect
SVP
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 1881
Concentration: Finance
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Oct 2013, 05:13
vishy007 wrote:
Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of hydrocarbons derived from organisms buried under ancient seas. Suppose, instead, that oil actually results from bacterial action on other complex hydrocarbons that are trapped within the Earth. As is well known, the volume of these hydrocarbons exceeds that of buried organisms. Therefore, our oil reserves would be greater than most geologists believe.

Which of the following, if true, gives the strongest support to the argument above about our oil reserves?

(A) Most geologists think optimistically about the Earths reserves of oil.

(B) Most geologists have performed accurate chemical analyses on previously discovered oil reserves.

(C) Ancient seas are buried within the Earth at many places where fossils are abundant.

(D) The only bacteria yet found in oil reserves could have leaked down drill holes from surface contaminants.

(E) Chemical transformations reduce the volume of buried hydrocarbons derived from organisms by roughly the same proportion as bacterial action reduces the volume of other complex hydrocarbons.

This is a close call between (B) and (E). Our conclusion states that oil reserves would be greater than most geologists believe.
We want to strengthen that claim. Now, first of all. We have that oil reserves > expected.

So for starters, we could use two pieces of evidence to strengthen this relationship.

Let's take a look at B first. We are being told that the current oil reserves are accurate. Therefore if we were to compare them with the new discoveries for bacterial, we could in fact know if the oil reserves would be greater than most scientists believe ONLY IF we could measure the oil reserves from bacterial action accurately, which is not addressed here and this is IMO the thing that makes this answer choice inferior to E.

On the other hand, in E we have that the proportion of oil that could be found from bacterial action measured in volume reduction is similar as that of the buried hydrocarbons. The stimulus already states that there is more volume of complex hydrocarbons than the fossils so given this new piece of information if rates are similar then the oil from this new type of source will be higher. So it is basically saying that there is a good and accurate way to measure these oil reserves. I think this answer choice does a pretty good job in strengthening the argument that oil reserves > expected

So I think E wins this one by a small margin

Hope it helps
Cheers!
J:)
Senior Manager
Status: You have to have the darkness for the dawn to come
Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Posts: 315
Daboo: Sonu
GMAT 1: 590 Q49 V20
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V38
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Nov 2016, 23:48
（E） for sure Chemical transformations reduce the volume of buried hydrocarbons derived from organisms by roughly the same proportion as bacterial action reduces the volume of other complex hydrocarbons.
_________________

You have to have the darkness for the dawn to come.

Give Kudos if you like my post

Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
Posts: 76
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2017, 14:32
Can anyone please explain E with the help of some numbers such as volume and proportion. Though i selected E but not able to get it clearly.

Thanks
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Feb 2015
Posts: 701
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2017, 12:10
Merged topics. Please, search before posting questions!
_________________

Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical   [#permalink] 08 Aug 2017, 12:10

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 25 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by