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

It is currently 22 Jun 2018, 17:52

Close

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

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

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
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

New post 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
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 1881
Concentration: Finance
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
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
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
Posts: 76
Reviews Badge
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 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
avatar
B
Joined: 13 Feb 2015
Posts: 701
Premium Member
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical [#permalink]

Show Tags

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

Please Read: Verbal Posting Rules

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

Most geologists believe oil results from chemical

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


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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®.