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

It is currently 11 Dec 2019, 05:15

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

Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 20 Mar 2008
Posts: 110
Location: USA
Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Jul 2008, 10:36
5
16
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  65% (hard)

Question Stats:

63% (02:20) correct 37% (02:31) wrong based on 766 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

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.


CR09461.01
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 120
Location: nj
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Jul 2008, 10:54
It should be E IMO.

because if both chemical transformation and bacteria are reducing hydrocarbon and complex hydrocarbons respectively to the same amount then obviously oil reserves will be more for the one which is in greater quantity beneath the earth( which is the complex hydrocarbon in this case)
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 27 May 2008
Posts: 384
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Jul 2008, 10:55
E. tranformation ratio is same, its given that there are more complex hydrocarbin than organism

100 organism --> chemical tranformation --> 10 oil
1000 complex hydrocarbon --> bacterial reaction --> 100 oil

means there'll be more oil
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 262
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2009, 19:53
2
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.
> lesser reserves > weaken.

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

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

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

(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.
> same 'yield' > but hydrocarbon is more abundant > conclusio is strengthened.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 71
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Sep 2009, 07:35
1
A) Most geologists think optimistically about the Earth's reserves of oil.
weakens the conclusion in a way.

(B) Most geologists have performed accurate chemical analyses on previously discovered oil
reserves.
this doesn't support the conclusion.

(C) Ancient seas are buried within the Earth at many places where fossils are abundant.
Not related

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

(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 shows the possibility of the stated Conclusion so strengthens :)
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 367
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 May 2011, 09:43
E strengthen the hypothetical conclusion that 'our oil reserves would be greater
than most geologists believe'.
because 'reduction in same proportion' is used , so greater amount of something -> more is left after proportional reduction.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Posts: 185
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Jul 2012, 05:45
Correct answer should be E.

Since both processes (bacterial and chemical) convert their respective starting materials (of which, by the way, there is more of for the chemical process), we can comfortably conclude that the reserves of oil would be more than previously thought.

Cheers,
Der alte Fritz.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 432
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 transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Oct 2012, 23:39
+1E

Premise 1 - 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.

Premise 2 - As is well known, the volume of these hydrocarbons exceeds that of buried organisms

Conclusion - Therefore, our oil reserves would be greater than most geologists believe.

If we look at premise 2 , it states that the “volume of the hydrocarbons exceeds that of buried organisms”. I think, if any option ascertains this or add something to the premise, it will be our answer.

Option E clearly states that that change in volume is same for both, (volume of the hydrocarbons exceeds that of buried organisms), (oil actually results from bacterial action on other complex hydrocarbons that are trapped within the Earth), these imply that the oil reserves are high.

:-D
_________________
First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 397
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
GPA: 3.23
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Oct 2012, 01:09
(A) Most geologists think optimistically about the Earth's reserves of oil.
What they think has no bearing on the actual truth about oil reserve.

(B) Most geologists have performed accurate chemical analyses on previously discovered oil reserves.
doesn't put any support on why there are greater oil reserve than what most believe

(C) Ancient seas are buried within the Earth at many places where fossils are abundant.
we need something that explains why we should think we can extract more oil

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

(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.
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1098
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 transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Oct 2012, 03:26
1
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
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 1545
Concentration: Finance
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#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
avatar
G
Joined: 04 Sep 2017
Posts: 291
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Sep 2019, 11:43
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.


CR09461.01


Official Explanation

Argument Evaluation

What new information, if added to the argument, would strengthen it?

The argument sets forth a novel hypothesis about how oil reserves are created. That is, oil reserves are created through bacterial action on complex hydrocarbons within the earth rather than through chemical transformation of hydrocarbons derived from organisms buried under ancient seas.

The argument notes that the volume of the hydrocarbons that bacteria transform to yield oil is greater than the volume of hydrocarbons derived from the buried organisms and concludes that total oil reserves are greater than most geologists believe them to be.

A. This suggests that most geologists might, if anything, be inclined to overestimate oil reserves. However, this consideration has little bearing on the chemical origin of oil or how much oil may remain buried in the earth.

B. This does not tell us whether the chemical analyses can identify whether the oil originated from hydrocarbons derived from buried organisms.

C. The existence of buried ancient seas has little, if any, relevance to the argument. This choice fails to provide evidence that by itself would help decide whether the hypothesized bacterial origin of oil actually supports the inference that oil reserves are greater than is currently assumed.

D. This suggests that bacteria have been found in some oil reserves; the potential importance of this discovery is unclear.

E. Correct. This strengthens the argument: if it is true, then the greater abundance of complex hydrocarbons from which it is hypothesized that oil can be derived through bacterial action would predict much larger oil reserves than exist under most geologists' current predictions.

The correct answer is E.
_________________
Kudos
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 01 Dec 2018
Posts: 67
CAT Tests
Re: Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Oct 2019, 08:00
1
[quote="vishy007"]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.


ANALYSIS
Passage clearly says bacterial action on other complex hydrocarbons (Lets call it B) exceeds (A)chemical transformations of hydrocarbons .

OPT ABD make no sense so they are out .

C Vs E
C is tempting but is wrong once you realise that passage already mentioned B is more than A as it exceeds A . If we choose C then it means we are going against the given facts .

So By POE you can reach to your answer E .
However dont let the word roughly the same proportion get you tempted to reject this option coz roughly the same can be the case if B is 10 and A is 9 (here B exceeds A and at same time is roughly same in proportion ).
Manager
Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 01 Feb 2017
Posts: 248
Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Oct 2019, 01:30
(A) Most geologists think optimistically about the Earths reserves of oil :
CANNOT CHALLENGE THE FACTS STATED IN PREMISE "Most geologists believe oil results from organisms buried under seas."

(B) Most geologists have performed accurate chemical analyses on previously discovered oil reserves.:
IRRELEVANT INFO, NO EFFECT ON CONCLUSION.

(C) Ancient seas are buried within the Earth at many places where fossils are abundant.:
RESTATE, NO NEW INFO "the volume of earth organisms exceeds that of sea buried organisms".

(D) The only bacteria yet found in oil reserves could have leaked down drill holes from surface contaminants.:
IRRELEVANT INFO, BACTERIA MIGHT NOT BE RELEVANT TO BACTERIAL ACTIONS FOR TRANSFORMATION OF COMPLEX ORGANISMS. OR A WEAKENER, IF RELEVANT. NEEDS REAL WORLD INFERENCE.

(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.:
CORRECT. VOLUME OF EARTH ORGANISMS IS GREATER THAN THAT OF SEA ORGANISMS / VOL REDUCTION IS SAME FOR EITHER PROCESS / SO, IT IS MOST LIKELY THAT FINAL PRODUCTION OF OIL FROM EARTH ORGANISMS WILL BE GREATER THAN THAT FROM SEA ORGANISMS.
GMAT Club Bot
Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of   [#permalink] 05 Oct 2019, 01:30
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of

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





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne