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

It is currently 17 Aug 2018, 02:54

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

Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the

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

Hide Tags

Retired Moderator
avatar
Joined: 13 Sep 2011
Posts: 281
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Oct 2011, 10:14
5
25
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

34% (01:31) correct 66% (01:34) wrong based on 1092 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the Yucatan peninsula in recent decades. The ruins lack any evidence of destruction by invading forces, internal revolts, or disease and appear simply to have been abandoned. Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD

Which of the following if true most strongly supports the archaeologists' theory?

A. Ample archaeological evidence of Mayan Peasant revolts and city-state warfare exists, but such events could never result in the permanent abandonment of cities.

B. No monumental inscriptions created after 900 AD have been found in these cities, but inscriptions dating before that time have been found in abundance.

C. studies of Yucatan Lake sediment cores provide conclusive evidence that a prolonged drought occurred in the region from 800 to 1000 AD

D. climatic studies have documented cycles of intermittent drought in the Yucatan peninsula dating from the present to at least 7000 years ago.

E. The Mayan City, Uxmal, was continuously inhabited from 500-1500 AD

Spoiler: :: Confused
I'm confused by the OA ! I thought it should have been C
Most Helpful Expert Reply
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4665
Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 May 2014, 08:58
9
4
georgepaul0071987 wrote:
Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the Yucatan peninsula in recent decades. The ruins lack any evidence of destruction by invading forces, internal revolts, or disease and appear simply to have been abandoned. Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD

Which of the following if true most strongly supports the archaeologists' theory?

A. Ample archaeological evidence of Mayan Peasant revolts and city-state warfare exists, but such events could never result in the permanent abandonment of cities.
B. No monumental inscriptions created after 900 AD have been found in these cities, but inscriptions dating before that time have been found in abundance.
C. studies of Yucatan Lake sediment cores provide conclusive evidence that a prolonged drought occurred in the region from 800 to 1000 AD
D. climatic studies have documented cycles of intermittent drought in the Yucatan peninsula dating from the present to at least 7000 years ago.
E. The Mayan City, Uxmal, was continuously inhabited from 500-1500 AD

JusTLucK04 wrote:
I choose C..Although I am incorrect..But I would like to point out that: In a real GMAT question are there 2 or more strengtheners such that one strengthens more than the other..As per what I have read..such is not the case..It is always 1 strengthener..and other neutrals,weakeners or irrelevants

Experts please vouch for the above

Dear JusTLucK04 & georgepaul0071987
I'm happy to respond. :-)

First of all, JusTLucK04, it is NOT true that GMAT CR strengthener questions often have two strengtheners, one better than the other. That is a relatively rare pattern. I would say they often have one or two weakeners, just as a weakener questions will have one or two strengtheners.

Veritas questions often are very good. Here, I don't like the diction mistake
... the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought ...
That's a classic diction mistake that would be wrong on the GMAT SC. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-idiom ... nsequence/

Now, to the argument. It is uncertain why they cities are empty --- it is possible that they were abandoned, because other things that would empty a city don't tally with the evidence. The drought is already known. According to the prompt, the occurrence of the drought is already beyond a shadow of a doubt.

(B) gives a new corroborating piece of evidence
(C) tells us something of which we are already sure

An answer that tells us something that we already know adds zilch to the argument. That's why (C) is wrong. This, of course, is what DexDee already astutely pointed out above.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Most Helpful Community Reply
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Posts: 66
Re: Numerous ancient mayan cities  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Oct 2011, 18:10
4
2
I pick option B.

B vs C.

The question premise clearly says that the drought is known to have occurred between 800 to 1000 AD. C simply reinstates the same fact. What we are looking for is the confirmation that the settlement was abandoned during said period. B is perfect. :)
General Discussion
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 216
Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Dec 2011, 02:11
2
2
B is the answer. C provides evidence of the occurrence of a drought between 800 and 1000 AD. But it cannot be inferred from C that the drought CAUSED the abandonment of the city.
B provides evidence that no monumental inscriptions were found after 900 AD. This increases the likelihood that there was a drought around 900 AD, thus supporting the conclusion. The strengthener just needs to increase the likelihood of the conclusion. That is exactly what B does in this case - increase the likelihood of the conclusion that the supposed drought caused the abandonment of the city.

Hope this helps.
_________________

Consider KUDOS if you feel the effort's worth it

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Posts: 404
Location: United States
Concentration: International Business, General Management
GPA: 3.86
WE: Accounting (Commercial Banking)
Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Dec 2011, 17:08
I too initially chose C,Here is my reasoning

From B..The Drought may have occurred before 800 AD, which weakens the conclusion....

From C, Though it may not be the best answer,but among options it looks the best........because we are sure that a drought occurred between 800 AD to 1000 AD, which supports the conclusion

Plz correct me if i am wrong...

Thanks in advance
_________________

+1 Kudos If found helpful..

Retired Moderator
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Sep 2013
Posts: 369
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V38
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 May 2014, 06:58
I choose C..Although I am incorrect..But I would like to point out that: In a real GMAT question are there 2 or more strengtheners such that one strengthens more than the other..As per what I have read..such is not the case..It is always 1 strengthener..and other neutrals,weakeners or irrelevants

Experts please vouch for the above
_________________

Appreciate the efforts...KUDOS for all
Don't let an extra chromosome get you down..:P

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 105
Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2014, 04:49
mikemcgarry wrote:
georgepaul0071987 wrote:
Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the Yucatan peninsula in recent decades. The ruins lack any evidence of destruction by invading forces, internal revolts, or disease and appear simply to have been abandoned. Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD

Which of the following if true most strongly supports the archaeologists' theory?

A. Ample archaeological evidence of Mayan Peasant revolts and city-state warfare exists, but such events could never result in the permanent abandonment of cities.
B. No monumental inscriptions created after 900 AD have been found in these cities, but inscriptions dating before that time have been found in abundance.
C. studies of Yucatan Lake sediment cores provide conclusive evidence that a prolonged drought occurred in the region from 800 to 1000 AD
D. climatic studies have documented cycles of intermittent drought in the Yucatan peninsula dating from the present to at least 7000 years ago.
E. The Mayan City, Uxmal, was continuously inhabited from 500-1500 AD

JusTLucK04 wrote:
I choose C..Although I am incorrect..But I would like to point out that: In a real GMAT question are there 2 or more strengtheners such that one strengthens more than the other..As per what I have read..such is not the case..It is always 1 strengthener..and other neutrals,weakeners or irrelevants

Experts please vouch for the above

Dear JusTLucK04 & georgepaul0071987
I'm happy to respond. :-)

First of all, JusTLucK04, it is NOT true that GMAT CR strengthener questions often have two strengtheners, one better than the other. That is a relatively rare pattern. I would say they often have one or two weakeners, just as a weakener questions will have one or two strengtheners.

Veritas questions often are very good. Here, I don't like the diction mistake
... the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought ...
That's a classic diction mistake that would be wrong on the GMAT SC. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-idiom ... nsequence/

Now, to the argument. It is uncertain why they cities are empty --- it is possible that they were abandoned, because other things that would empty a city don't tally with the evidence. The drought is already known. According to the prompt, the occurrence of the drought is already beyond a shadow of a doubt.

(B) gives a new corroborating piece of evidence
(C) tells us something of which we are already sure

An answer that tells us something that we already know adds zilch to the argument. That's why (C) is wrong. This, of course, is what DexDee already astutely pointed out above.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)


But Mike, we don't know that the cities were abandoned because of the drought that occurred. The Archaeologists only theorized. IMO there is a difference between theory and evidence. The Scientists were just speculating. Even if the the speculation was reasonable, there wasn't any evidence!
Option C strengthens the conclusion by presenting 'that' evidence.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4665
Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2014, 13:06
5
3
mahendru1992 wrote:
But Mike, we don't know that the cities were abandoned because of the drought that occurred. The Archaeologists only theorized. IMO there is a difference between theory and evidence. The Scientists were just speculating. Even if the the speculation was reasonable, there wasn't any evidence!
Option C strengthens the conclusion by presenting 'that' evidence.

Dear mahendru1992,
I'm happy to respond. Let's look carefully at the last sentence of the prompt:
Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD

The statement of causality, drought caused abandonment, is indeed part of the archaeologists' theory, their best guess. That's pure speculation, not fact. By contrast, we are told the "severe drought" itself is "known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD." That's not part of the theory. That's agreed-upon scientific fact. Essentially, the archaeologists are saying, "We all know about that drought. We think that drought caused those folks to abandon those cities." The modifier in that last sentence, beginning with the participle "known," informs us very clearly which parts of the sentence are speculation and which are fact.

Choice (C) simply confirms this fact, a fact that was already "known" before we found out about (C).

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Current Student
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Jan 2015
Posts: 85
Location: Thailand
GMAT 1: 540 Q41 V23
GMAT 2: 570 Q44 V24
GMAT 3: 550 Q44 V21
GMAT 4: 660 Q48 V33
GPA: 3.31
WE: Science (Other)
Re: #Top150 CR: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Dec 2015, 22:12
Why B is correct?

The cities might be abandoned from other factors during 800 to 1000 AD.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2014
Posts: 208
GMAT Date: 08-04-2015
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: #Top150 CR: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Dec 2015, 22:41
Aves wrote:
Why B is correct?

The cities might be abandoned from other factors during 800 to 1000 AD.


Yes, definitely other factors during 800 to 1000 AD can play their role in the abandonment. But, B makes the conclusion MORE believable, isn't it? Thus, B is a valid strengthener. Remember, a strengthener need not prove truth of the conclusion.

Thanks
Current Student
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Jan 2015
Posts: 85
Location: Thailand
GMAT 1: 540 Q41 V23
GMAT 2: 570 Q44 V24
GMAT 3: 550 Q44 V21
GMAT 4: 660 Q48 V33
GPA: 3.31
WE: Science (Other)
Re: #Top150 CR: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Dec 2015, 22:44
binit wrote:
Aves wrote:
Why B is correct?

The cities might be abandoned from other factors during 800 to 1000 AD.


Yes, definitely other factors during 800 to 1000 AD can play their role in the abandonment. But, B makes the conclusion MORE believable, isn't it? Thus, B is a valid strengthener. Remember, a strengthener need not prove truth of the conclusion.

Thanks


Can you explain why C is incorrect, please?
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2014
Posts: 208
GMAT Date: 08-04-2015
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: #Top150 CR: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Dec 2015, 22:58
1
1
Aves wrote:
binit wrote:
Aves wrote:
Why B is correct?

The cities might be abandoned from other factors during 800 to 1000 AD.


Yes, definitely other factors during 800 to 1000 AD can play their role in the abandonment. But, B makes the conclusion MORE believable, isn't it? Thus, B is a valid strengthener. Remember, a strengthener need not prove truth of the conclusion.

Thanks


Can you explain why C is incorrect, please?


Sure. The conclusion says: Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD
Since the drought is already known to have occurred, choice C just repeats the premise.
Thnx.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 01 Jan 2015
Posts: 15
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: #Top150 CR: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2015, 01:18
Hi binit,
Isn't the question says to strengthen the archaeologists thoery ? And Archaeologist's theory clearly says that "Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD" So why not C ?
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2014
Posts: 208
GMAT Date: 08-04-2015
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: #Top150 CR: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2015, 02:23
1
subhamoycomputer wrote:
Hi binit,
Isn't the question says to strengthen the archaeologists thoery ? And Archaeologist's theory clearly says that "Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD" So why not C ?



Hi subhamoycomputer

C. Studies of Yucatan Lake sediment cores provide conclusive evidence that a prolonged drought occurred in the region from 800 to 1000 AD.

In other words, C confirms that a prolonged drought occurred in the region. BUT we already knew it, right? The drought was well known. So, C is just the repetition of an info already known. Is that okay?
U can't strengthen by repeating a already known info. So, C is wrong.

U need to add something new that can make the conclusion more believable. So, B is correct.

Pls note, C is a classic wrong answer (strengthener), GMAT always uses to trap test-takers.
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 27 Dec 2016
Posts: 202
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
CAT Tests
Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Nov 2017, 16:36
Could anyone please explain to me why option A is incorrect?
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4665
Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Nov 2017, 11:06
1
csaluja wrote:
Could anyone please explain to me why option A is incorrect?

Dear csaluja,

I'm happy to respond. :-)

My friend, I am going to chide you. This is not a high quality question. Think about the amount of effort you put into writing this question--probably not much. The way education works is that you have to put in your own effort to move forward. Furthermore, if you don't understand (A), what don't you understand? Why doesn't it make sense to you about why (A) is wrong? What do you think it could be correct? If you explain yourself in detail, you make your question clearer to an expert who can answer it, but more importantly, explaining your thought-process helps you to understand the logic of the question more deeply, and that increased understanding would help you assimilate more deeply any answer. See:
Asking Excellent Questions
Here is my challenge to you. First, read this linked blog article. Then, come back to this thread, and study each entry, looking for discussion of (A). Finally, write the highest quality question you can, explaining your thought process thoroughly. If you do all this, I will be more than happy to answer you.

Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 07 Jun 2015
Posts: 85
WE: Design (Aerospace and Defense)
Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Nov 2017, 23:30
mikemcgarry I have some doubts regarding this CR.It is mentioned in the argument that "Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD"

Option C directly strengthen the "theory by Some Archaeologists" by stating that ''........cores provide conclusive evidence''. D sounds more vague and it has to be further assumed that the monumental inscriptions created after 900 AD will never be found. It will be helpful if you clarify this doubt.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4665
Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2017, 11:36
pkm9995109794 wrote:
mikemcgarry I have some doubts regarding this CR.It is mentioned in the argument that "Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD"

Option C directly strengthen the "theory by Some Archaeologists" by stating that ''........cores provide conclusive evidence''. D sounds more vague and it has to be further assumed that the monumental inscriptions created after 900 AD will never be found. It will be helpful if you clarify this doubt.

Dear pkm9995109794,

I'm happy to respond. :-)

First, let's look at that sentence from the prompt:
Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD.
That's a complicated sentence, because it contains both evidence & conclusion.

The factual, evidence part is the fact that a "severe drought . . . occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD." That's a fact, thoroughly know and beyond dispute.

The conclusion, the controversial part, is why these cities were abandoned, when they were abandoned, and whether the drought had anything to do with it. The argument is about that.

Yes, I agree that (C) is a strong statement, but the problem with (C) is that it tells us what we already know. From the prompt, we already had zero doubt about that "severe drought," so (C) simply piles more evidence for what already is certain. That's not particularly helpful.

You mentioned (D), but I think you meant the OA, (B). Another thing I want to make clear is that the GMAT CR arguments are not about proof. They are not about mathematical certainty. Sometimes a strengthener will be very strong and will come close to guaranteeing the argument. Other times, a strengthener simply adds further evidence or another line of support for something.

Think about the archaeologists: these people are academics and they are trying to build a plausible case for a scenario that occurred over a millennium ago. Nothing about archaeology involves proof beyond doubt: it's the very nature of the discipline that there's always a certain amount of uncertainty. We are looking for a story that most plausible, not for something that constitutes watertight proof.

With this mind, consider (B). Up until this point, the archaeologists knew about the drought and were trying to build a case that these ancient cities were abandoned in the 800 - 1000 AD period. Choice (B) provides a completely different category of evidence. "No monumental inscriptions created after 900 AD have been found in these cities, but inscriptions dating before that time have been found in abundance." In terms of archaeology, that's exceptionally strong evidence--lots of inscriptions up to about 900 AD, and they all of sudden, they stop. Wow! A sudden break in the historical record: this certainly would corroborate the story that the archaeologists were trying to build, that the abandonment of the cities was something that happened in a sudden catastrophic way, rather than, say, in a process of gradual attrition.

You said that choice (B) "sounds more vague and it has to be further assumed that the monumental inscriptions created after 900 AD will never be found." Keep in mind that these are inscription on monuments. One of the defining qualities of a monument is its large size--that's precisely why we have the English word "monumental." If we were discussing inscriptions on something small, then it would be conceivable that some would be found and some not found. Instead, we are discussing monuments, which as a general rule are very hard to miss. It sounds as if there are multiple monuments on which there are copious inscriptions from the time before 900 AD and then absolutely none after that point. It's not as if any inscriptions on a monument are going to be hidden: the whole point of inscriptions on monuments is to make them as visible as possible. It's not likely that there would be multiple monuments that the archeologists don't find, and it's not likely that they would miss a large number of inscriptions on any monument they find. Thus, it's not really an "assumption" that later inscriptions will not be found. Any familiarity with the tangible processes here would make this evident.

I am going to guess that you don't have detailed knowledge of archeology. I will recommend that whenever you encounter a GMAT Verbal Practice problem about a topic about which you know little, it can be very good reading practice to read a little more about that topic. Also, for the GMAT CR, it's very important to have some idea about real events in the real world. See:
GMAT Critical Reasoning and Outside Knowledge

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Mar 2018
Posts: 46
Location: United Kingdom
GMAT 1: 650 Q45 V35
Re: Numerous ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the Yucatan  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Apr 2018, 03:50
My opinion C should be correct

Argument conclusion : Archaeologists theorised that cities were Abondened due to severe draught bw 800-1000 AD.

To strengthen it we need an evidence that could add ot this theory.

1. Option A : Agianst the conclusion as it would mean cities were nit abondened.

2. Option B: Inscriptions not found after 900 AD adds to our theory that something did happen to people living in those cities BUT it doesn’t strengthen the conclusion to provide or add to the draught theory. Hence no not correct.

Option C: okay so here we have something related to draught theory that could prove severe draught did happen. Keep it as Option.

Option D: Has something related to draught but Not conclusive enough to strengthen the conclusion.

Option E: Extra info doesn’t help.

So Option C has the most optimal evidence to strengthen the draught theory as provided in argument.




Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 47948
Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 May 2018, 11:13
georgepaul0071987 wrote:
Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the Yucatan peninsula in recent decades. The ruins lack any evidence of destruction by invading forces, internal revolts, or disease and appear simply to have been abandoned. Some archaeologists have theorized that the cities were abandoned due to a severe drought known to have occurred in the region between 800 and 1000 AD

Which of the following if true most strongly supports the archaeologists' theory?

A. Ample archaeological evidence of Mayan Peasant revolts and city-state warfare exists, but such events could never result in the permanent abandonment of cities.

B. No monumental inscriptions created after 900 AD have been found in these cities, but inscriptions dating before that time have been found in abundance.

C. studies of Yucatan Lake sediment cores provide conclusive evidence that a prolonged drought occurred in the region from 800 to 1000 AD

D. climatic studies have documented cycles of intermittent drought in the Yucatan peninsula dating from the present to at least 7000 years ago.

E. The Mayan City, Uxmal, was continuously inhabited from 500-1500 AD

Spoiler: :: Confused
I'm confused by the OA ! I thought it should have been C


VERITAS PREP OFFICIAL SOLUTION:



If you had anticipated a problem or gap in the previous argument before going to the answer choices on this problem, it would not have been “We don’t know if the drought occurred.” The argument specifically tells you that the drought was known to have occurred. However, the argument is lacking one very important piece of information. The argument states that a drought occurred between 800 AD and 1000 AD and concludes that this drought must have caused the disappearance of the Maya. However, absolutely no evidence is given that the Maya actually disappeared during the time of the drought. Answer choice B gives you exactly that missing piece of information and is thus correct. Almost any person who is new to critical reasoning makes the mistake of picking answer choice C on this problem because it seems to be important. Had you considered the argument before moving to answer choices, it is unlikely you would have made this mistake.
_________________

New to the Math Forum?
Please read this: Ultimate GMAT Quantitative Megathread | All You Need for Quant | PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW: 12 Rules for Posting!!!

Resources:
GMAT Math Book | Triangles | Polygons | Coordinate Geometry | Factorials | Circles | Number Theory | Remainders; 8. Overlapping Sets | PDF of Math Book; 10. Remainders | GMAT Prep Software Analysis | SEVEN SAMURAI OF 2012 (BEST DISCUSSIONS) | Tricky questions from previous years.

Collection of Questions:
PS: 1. Tough and Tricky questions; 2. Hard questions; 3. Hard questions part 2; 4. Standard deviation; 5. Tough Problem Solving Questions With Solutions; 6. Probability and Combinations Questions With Solutions; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 12 Easy Pieces (or not?); 9 Bakers' Dozen; 10 Algebra set. ,11 Mixed Questions, 12 Fresh Meat

DS: 1. DS tough questions; 2. DS tough questions part 2; 3. DS tough questions part 3; 4. DS Standard deviation; 5. Inequalities; 6. 700+ GMAT Data Sufficiency Questions With Explanations; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 The Discreet Charm of the DS; 9 Devil's Dozen!!!; 10 Number Properties set., 11 New DS set.


What are GMAT Club Tests?
Extra-hard Quant Tests with Brilliant Analytics

Re: Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the &nbs [#permalink] 27 May 2018, 11:13

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 23 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Numerous Ancient Mayan cities have been discovered in the

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

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


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®.