It is currently 22 Oct 2017, 19:56

### 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

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

### Hide Tags

Moderator
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1216

Kudos [?]: 1663 [0], given: 116

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Oct 2012, 03:26
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
E is right. We can check by negating E and seeing whether that would weaken the conclusion.
Chemical transformations reduce the volume of buried hydrocarbons derived from organisms in a much greater proportion than bacterial action reduces the volume of other complex hydrocarbons. - This would mean that even though the volume of the hydrocarbons exceeds that of buried organisms, the oil reserves resulting from bacterial action on them might be much lesser.
eg: If 10000000000 Kgs of the hydrocarbons only gives 1 litre of oil this would hardly make any difference
_________________

Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types

Kudos [?]: 1663 [0], given: 116

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 519

Kudos [?]: 336 [0], given: 269

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Oct 2012, 03:31
MacFauz wrote:
E is right. We can check by negating E and seeing whether that would weaken the conclusion.
Chemical transformations reduce the volume of buried hydrocarbons derived from organisms in a much greater proportion than bacterial action reduces the volume of other complex hydrocarbons. - This would mean that even though the volume of the hydrocarbons exceeds that of buried organisms, the oil reserves resulting from bacterial action on them might be much lesser.
eg: If 10000000000 Kgs of the hydrocarbons only gives 1 litre of oil this would hardly make any difference

Negation technique is used only in Assumptions type. Don't you think?

_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Kudos [?]: 336 [0], given: 269

Moderator
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1216

Kudos [?]: 1663 [0], given: 116

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Oct 2012, 04:36
getgyan wrote:
MacFauz wrote:
E is right. We can check by negating E and seeing whether that would weaken the conclusion.
Chemical transformations reduce the volume of buried hydrocarbons derived from organisms in a much greater proportion than bacterial action reduces the volume of other complex hydrocarbons. - This would mean that even though the volume of the hydrocarbons exceeds that of buried organisms, the oil reserves resulting from bacterial action on them might be much lesser.
eg: If 10000000000 Kgs of the hydrocarbons only gives 1 litre of oil this would hardly make any difference

Negation technique is used only in Assumptions type. Don't you think?

True. However, you can see that what I did was not negation per se. The "opposite" maybe would be a better term to describe it. My logic is that a statement which strengthens a conclusion when "opposited"(for lack of a better word) should weaken the conclusion.
_________________

Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types

Kudos [?]: 1663 [0], given: 116

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 294

Kudos [?]: 296 [0], given: 32

Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2012, 23:41
kingb 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 Earth's 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.

King - could you please let us know the source of these problems please?
Thanks in anticipation...

Kudos [?]: 296 [0], given: 32

Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2012
Posts: 188

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 349

Concentration: General Management, Operations
Schools: HBS '19 (S)
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
Re: CR : Most geologists believe oil results [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2013, 02:30
rnemani wrote:
IMO C ---> Reasoning that the fossils that are formed from abundant fossils strengthen the point that the earth reserves are more.
IS my reasoning flawed

even i chose C ... can anyone explain why not C??

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 349

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 333

Kudos [?]: 421 [0], given: 4

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
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0

... and more

Kudos [?]: 421 [0], given: 4

Current Student
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 1978

Kudos [?]: 719 [0], given: 355

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:)

Kudos [?]: 719 [0], given: 355

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10105

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 0

Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 May 2014, 02:53
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10105

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 0

Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2014, 02:10
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10105

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 0

Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2015, 14:40
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10105

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 0

Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jul 2016, 13:41
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Status: You have to have the darkness for the dawn to come
Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Posts: 319

Kudos [?]: 205 [0], given: 159

Location: India
saurav: suman
Concentration: Operations, Technology
GMAT 1: 590 Q49 V20
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V38
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
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

Kudos [?]: 205 [0], given: 159

Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
Posts: 76

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 77

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

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 77

Director
Joined: 13 Feb 2015
Posts: 816

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 32

Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

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

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 32

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

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 34 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Most geologists believe oil results from chemical

 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®.