It is currently 17 Dec 2017, 00:22

### 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

# Professor Smith published a paper arguing that a chemical

Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 278

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 0

Location: CA, USA
Professor Smith published a paper arguing that a chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2005, 21:50
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Professor Smith published a paper arguing that a chemical found in minute quantities in most drinking water had an adverse effect on the human nervous system. Existing scientific theory held that no such effect was possible because there was no neural mechanism for bringing it about. Several papers by well-known scientists in the field followed, unanimously purporting to prove Professor Smith wrong. This clearly shows that the scientific establishment was threatened by Professor Smithâ€™s work and conspired to discredit it.
Which one of the following is the central flaw in the argument given by the author of the passage?
(A) The author passes over the possibility that Professor Smith had much to gain should Professor Smithâ€™s discovery have found general acceptance.
(B) The author fails to mention whether or not Professor Smith knew that the existence of the alleged new effect was incompatible with established scientific theory.
(C) The author fails to show why the other scientists could not have been presenting evidence in order to establish the truth of the matter.
(D) The author neglects to clarify what his or her relationship to Professor Smith is.
(E) The author fails to indicate what, if any, effect the publication of Professor Smithâ€™s paper had on the publicâ€™s confidence in the safety of most drinking water.

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 498

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2005, 22:28
I would go with C.
What is the OA?

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 498

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Nov 2005, 22:33
I would go with C.
What is the OA?

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 1883

Kudos [?]: 396 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: chemical in drinking water [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2005, 02:32
qpoo wrote:
Professor Smith published a paper arguing that a chemical found in minute quantities in most drinking water had an adverse effect on the human nervous system. Existing scientific theory held that no such effect was possible because there was no neural mechanism for bringing it about. Several papers by well-known scientists in the field followed, unanimously purporting to prove Professor Smith wrong. This clearly shows that the scientific establishment was threatened by Professor Smithâ€™s work and conspired to discredit it.
Which one of the following is the central flaw in the argument given by the author of the passage?
(A) The author passes over the possibility that Professor Smith had much to gain should Professor Smithâ€™s discovery have found general acceptance.
(B) The author fails to mention whether or not Professor Smith knew that the existence of the alleged new effect was incompatible with established scientific theory.
(C) The author fails to show why the other scientists could not have been presenting evidence in order to establish the truth of the matter.
(D) The author neglects to clarify what his or her relationship to Professor Smith is.
(E) The author fails to indicate what, if any, effect the publication of Professor Smithâ€™s paper had on the publicâ€™s confidence in the safety of most drinking water.

IMO, this is a typical case of statistic assumption, which picks several groups/individual to generalize the idea. The weakness of this kind lies on whether the groups picked are good representatives. C it is : "The author fails to show why the other scientists could not have been presenting evidence in order to establish the truth of the matter."

Kudos [?]: 396 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 223

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 0

Location: Germany
Re: CR: chemical in drinking water [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2005, 05:43
I would also go with C, because somehow a relationship must be formed between Professor Smith's discovery and the other scientists. Only C addresses that point.

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1699

Kudos [?]: 494 [0], given: 0

Location: Dhaka

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2005, 09:54
I don't think C is right.
Existing scientific theory held that no such effect was possible because there was no neural mechanism for bringing it about
is an evidence that scientists could not support Mr. Smith

D is personal Attack
E is out of scope.
B. Irrelevant.

I think A is the only choice.
_________________

hey ya......

Kudos [?]: 494 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 231

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2005, 10:51

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 278

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 0

Location: CA, USA

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2005, 19:54
the OA is C
I do not have OE

But it looks like other answers are a little far-fetched except C.

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 0

08 Nov 2005, 19:54
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Professor Smith published a paper arguing that a chemical

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 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®.