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

 It is currently 22 Jan 2019, 13:00

### 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 January
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
303112345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829303112
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### The winners of the GMAT game show

January 22, 2019

January 22, 2019

10:00 PM PST

11:00 PM PST

In case you didn’t notice, we recently held the 1st ever GMAT game show and it was awesome! See who won a full GMAT course, and register to the next one.
• ### Key Strategies to Master GMAT SC

January 26, 2019

January 26, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Attend this webinar to learn how to leverage Meaning and Logic to solve the most challenging Sentence Correction Questions.

# On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientis

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 03 Aug 2010
Posts: 98
GMAT Date: 08-08-2011
On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 10 Oct 2018, 22:25
1
5
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

34% (01:19) correct 66% (01:55) wrong based on 504 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientists uncovered skeletal remains from about 100,000 years ago. Surprisingly, all the skeletal remains, which included many species from differing biological families and spanned about two thousand years, showed evidence of experiencing temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees Fahrenheit (or 538 degrees Celsius).

Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent paradox between the cold environment and the evidence of the bones experiencing hot temperatures?

(A) Other scientific research released two years before the expedition showed that the remote region of northern Canada underwent considerable warming in the past 100,000 years.

(B) Chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north Canadian species produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition scientists found.

(C) A little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern Canada.

(D) Strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire to cook animals.

(E) In the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans.

Originally posted by Yalephd on 29 Mar 2011, 19:17.
Last edited by Bunuel on 10 Oct 2018, 22:25, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Intern
Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Posts: 49
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V31
GPA: 3.45
WE: Marketing (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2012, 23:57
5

Official Explanation:

The paradox: Northern Canada is quite cold and yet skeletal remains show evidence of experiencing very hot temperatures. This paradox could be explained by finding evidence that fires regularly occurred that would have subjected the bones to excruciatingly hot temperatures. If evidence existed that early humans from this time period hunted animals and started fires (implicitly for the purpose of cooking the animals--thereby creating skeletons of animals that experienced hot temperatures), a large step in explaining the paradox would be taken.

A. Unraveling the paradox depends on providing an explanation of how the skeletal remains experienced such hot temperatures yet this answer only heightens the paradox as it provides evidence that the skeletons' environment was much colder (not warmer) many years ago.

B. Although this provides an explanation of how "exactly one north Canadian species'" skeletons showed evidence of exposure to hot temperatures, it fails to account for why "many species from differing biological families [that] spanned about two thousand years showed" the same evidence of exposure to hot temperatures.

C. This answer provides an explanation for skeletons showing evidence of experiencing hot temperatures. However, this answer does not explain why this evidence appeared among skeletons whose date "spanned about two thousand years." Further, the fire occurred "a little over 103,000 years ago" while the original argument makes clear that some of the skeletons which showed evidence of experiencing hot temperatures dated after this fire (i.e., the skeletons were from 100,000 years ago and "spanned about two thousand years" while the fire occurred "over 103,000 years ago").

D. The paradox exists in skeletons dating back to 100,000 years ago. Consequently, explaining how a fire (and thus hot temperatures) could have existed "as early as 70,000 years ago" does not explain the paradox. In other words, this answer does not explain how the skeletons of animals 100,000 years old experienced hot temperatures (although it would explain how skeletons 70,000 years old experienced hot temperatures).

E. While this answer does not prove what caused the chared skeletal remains, it "best explains" how the skeletons experienced hot temperatures (i.e., the hunters cut wood and, implied in this, they started fires to cook animals).
##### General Discussion
Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1419
Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Re: On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Mar 2011, 00:55

A) Other scientific research released two years before the expedition showed that the remote region of northern
Canada underwent considerable warming in the past 100,000 years. - This is not relevant, warming for last 100,0000 years can't produce such heat 100,000 years back.

B) Chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north Canadian species
produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition
scientists found. - Only 1 species, what about the rest ?
C) A little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern Canada. - Can't assume the fire span across two thousand years ! It's not mentioned either
D) Strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire
to cook animals. - But what about 100,000 years ago ?

E) In the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans. - This is correct by POE, human beings used to hunt and cook animals over a span of hundreds of years
_________________

Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3279
Re: On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2011, 05:35
1
E not for POE but also for logic: is the only answer that helps us saying: in the same area at the same age, someone hunted somthing with certain tools..............and if someone hunted something we can infeer that was there......resolving the paradox
_________________
Manager
Joined: 20 Jul 2012
Posts: 128
Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Nov 2013, 17:48
Yalephd wrote:
On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientists uncovered skeletal remains from about 100,000 years ago. Surprisingly, all the skeletal remains, which included many species from differing biological families and spanned about two thousand years, showed evidence of experiencing temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees Fahrenheit (or 538 degrees Celsius).

Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent paradox between the cold environment and the evidence of the bones experiencing hot temperatures?

A) Other scientific research released two years before the expedition showed that the remote region of northern
Canada underwent considerable warming in the past 100,000 years.

B) Chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north Canadian species
produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition
scientists found.

C) A little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern Canada.

D) Strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire
to cook animals.

E) In the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans.

I'm not feeling any of the answer choices for this question.

What is the source of the question?Experts please help. I was able to eliminate a,b,c and d but still not convinced with answer option e.
Manager
Joined: 07 May 2012
Posts: 59
Location: United States
Re: On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2013, 10:37
1
1
akankshasoneja wrote:
Yalephd wrote:
On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientists uncovered skeletal remains from about 100,000 years ago. Surprisingly, all the skeletal remains, which included many species from differing biological families and spanned about two thousand years, showed evidence of experiencing temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees Fahrenheit (or 538 degrees Celsius).

Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent paradox between the cold environment and the evidence of the bones experiencing hot temperatures?

A) Other scientific research released two years before the expedition showed that the remote region of northern
Canada underwent considerable warming in the past 100,000 years.

B) Chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north Canadian species
produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition
scientists found.

C) A little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern Canada.

D) Strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire
to cook animals.

E) In the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans.

I'm not feeling any of the answer choices for this question.

What is the source of the question?Experts please help. I was able to eliminate a,b,c and d but still not convinced with answer option e.

I am guessing it is from platinum gmat , cos this is the explanation I found , on platinum gmat ..

The paradox: Northern Canada is quite cold and yet skeletal remains show evidence of experiencing very hot temperatures. This paradox could be explained by finding evidence that fires regularly occurred that would have subjected the bones to excruciatingly hot temperatures. If evidence existed that early humans from this time period hunted animals and started fires (implicitly for the purpose of cooking the animals--thereby creating skeletons of animals that experienced hot temperatures), a large step in explaining the paradox would be taken.

A. Unraveling the paradox depends on providing an explanation of how the skeletal remains experienced such hot temperatures yet this answer only heightens the paradox as it provides evidence that the skeletons' environment was much colder (not warmer) many years ago.
B. Although this provides an explanation of how "exactly one north Canadian species'" skeletons showed evidence of exposure to hot temperatures, it fails to account for why "many species from differing biological families [that] spanned about two thousand years showed" the same evidence of exposure to hot temperatures.
C. This answer provides an explanation for skeletons showing evidence of experiencing hot temperatures. However, this answer does not explain why this evidence appeared among skeletons whose date "spanned about two thousand years." Further, the fire occurred "a little over 103,000 years ago" while the original argument makes clear that some of the skeletons which showed evidence of experiencing hot temperatures dated after this fire (i.e., the skeletons were from 100,000 years ago and "spanned about two thousand years" while the fire occurred "over 103,000 years ago").
D. The paradox exists in skeletons dating back to 100,000 years ago. Consequently, explaining how a fire (and thus hot temperatures) could have existed "as early as 70,000 years ago" does not explain the paradox. In other words, this answer does not explain how the skeletons of animals 100,000 years old experienced hot temperatures (although it would explain how skeletons 70,000 years old experienced hot temperatures).
E. While this answer does not prove what caused the chared skeletal remains, it "best explains" how the skeletons experienced hot temperatures (i.e., the hunters cut wood and, implied in this, they started fires to cook animals).
_________________

Jyothi hosamani

Director
Joined: 04 Jun 2016
Posts: 570
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V43
Re: On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientis  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jun 2016, 04:12
I laughed really hard when i saw this question. Sometimes these outside test makers make such weird and funny questions that one cannot do anything except laugh and smile at their "ingenuity" (read- stupidity)

Anyway for me the answer is E (again lol )

A) Other scientific research released two years before the expedition showed that the remote region of northern Canada underwent considerable warming in the past 100,000 years. Global warming cannot produce 2000 Celsius or Fahrenheit whatever temperature is mentioned.

B) Chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north Canadian species produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition scientists found. Many species from differing family were exposed to 2000 celsius , not only one.

C) A little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern Canada.
Then the skeletal remain should not vary for 2000 years. They all should have a narrow time period.

D) Strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire to cook animals.
HOLD IT . can be the answer

E) In the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans.
Correct:- Yup , (same layer means same time period, as per geology one particular layer generally contains all elements that were present in the same area in the same time) Rudimentary wood cutting tools.. may be for woods for burning fire. Hunting tools . may be too hunt animals for food. Now since skeleton age range for 2000 years , it is quite possible that people hunt and cooked animals in that area and lived there for at least 2000 years.

BUT OVERALL LOL .. ROFL

Yalephd wrote:
On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientists uncovered skeletal remains from about 100,000 years ago. Surprisingly, all the skeletal remains, which included many species from differing biological families and spanned about two thousand years, showed evidence of experiencing temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees Fahrenheit (or 538 degrees Celsius).

Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent paradox between the cold environment and the evidence of the bones experiencing hot temperatures?

A) Other scientific research released two years before the expedition showed that the remote region of northern
Canada underwent considerable warming in the past 100,000 years.

B) Chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north Canadian species
produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition
scientists found.

C) A little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern Canada.

D) Strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire
to cook animals.

E) In the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans.

I'm not feeling any of the answer choices for this question.

_________________

Posting an answer without an explanation is "GOD COMPLEX". The world doesn't need any more gods. Please explain you answers properly.
FINAL GOODBYE :- 17th SEPTEMBER 2016. .. 16 March 2017 - I am back but for all purposes please consider me semi-retired.

Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Oct 2017
Posts: 312
GMAT 1: 560 Q42 V25
GMAT 2: 570 Q43 V27
GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V39
#Top150 CR: On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Feb 2018, 23:59
1
On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern Canada, scientists uncovered skeletal remains from about 100,000 years ago. Surprisingly, all the skeletal remains, which included many species from differing biological families and spanned about two thousand years, showed evidence of experiencing temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees Fahrenheit (or 538 degrees Celsius).

Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent paradox between the cold environment and the evidence of the bones experiencing hot temperatures?

A. Other scientific research released two years before the expedition showed that the remote region of northern Canada underwent considerable warming in the past 100,000 years. "Warming" does not explain high temperatures as the reason for the extinction of the species. Incorrect.

B. Chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north Canadian species produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition scientists found. The process of decay in "one" species can not be extrapolated to explain the reason of "all" skeletons of "many" species. Keywords here to focus-"all" & "many". Incorrect.

C. A little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern Canada. Cannot be used to explain the skeletons of species "spanning about two thousand years". Fire=103,000 years ago; skeleton of species=100,000 +/- 2000 years ago. The puzzle still has missing piece. Incorrect.

D. Strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire to cook animals. We are not looking at 70,000 years ago. Incorrect.

E. In the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans. Okay, so this means they needed wood and they were hunters. Can explain why "many" species showed evidence of high temperatures. Again, we wanted information about "many" species, not "all" species. Fits the bill. Correct.
Intern
Joined: 20 Apr 2018
Posts: 43
#Top150 CR: On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2018, 19:28
How E is correct? Wood Cutting and hunting tools doesn't talk about bones experiencing hot temperatures. That is too much of outside knowledge. Can you explain reasoning behind this answer to the question? Do we see questions like these in actual GMAT?

_________________

Manager
Status: EAT SLEEP GMAT REPEAT!
Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Posts: 167
Location: India
Re: #Top150 CR: On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2018, 19:43
2
I thinks its E because according to E, humans used to live in that region for an extensive period of time (atleast 2000 yrs) and they used to hunt and cook, using wood cutting and hunting tools, many species from different biological families. This choice directly talks about the same layer of excavation and resolves the paradox between the cold environment and the evidence of the bones experiencing hot temperatures.

+1 if this helps!

Gmat800Champ wrote:
How E is correct? Wood Cutting and hunting tools doesn't talk about bones experiencing hot temperatures. That is too much of outside knowledge. Can you explain reasoning behind this answer to the question? Do we see questions like these in actual GMAT?

_________________

Regards,

Re: #Top150 CR: On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern &nbs [#permalink] 05 May 2018, 19:43
Display posts from previous: Sort by