It is currently 18 Oct 2017, 17:41

### 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

# Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 03 Jul 2003
Posts: 651

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 0

Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Mar 2004, 19:08
7
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

25% (01:33) correct 75% (01:51) wrong based on 319 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

11. Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the evolutionary theory that dinosaurs are more closely related to reptiles than to other classes of animals. Fossils show that some dinosaurs had hollow bones-a feature found today only in warm-blooded creatures, such as birds, that have a high metabolic rate. Dinosaurs had well-developed senses of sight and hearing, which is not true of present-day cold-blooded creatures like reptiles. The highly arched mouth roof of some dinosaurs would have permitted them to breathe while eating, as fast-breathing animals, such as birds, need to do. Today, all fast-breathing animals are warm-blooded. Finally, fossils reveal that many dinosaurs had a pattern of growth typical of warm-blooded animals.

The argument in the passage proceeds by

(A) attempting to justify one position by demonstrating that an opposing position is based on erroneous information

(B) establishing a general principle that it then uses to draw a conclusion about a particular case

(C) dismissing a claim made about the present on the basis of historical evidence

(D) assuming that if all members of a category have a certain property then all things with that property belong to the category

(E) presenting evidence that a past phenomenon is more similar to one rather than the other of two present-day phenomena

Could some one explain the difference between position, principle, claim, and phenomenon. I thought I know the difference, but this question proved me otherwise!
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by carcass on 10 May 2016, 02:27, edited 1 time in total.
Editing the post and adding the OA and Tags

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 31 Mar 2015
Posts: 10

Kudos [?]: 2 [1], given: 122

Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V32
GPA: 3.41
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2016, 19:47
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Here is a great explanation from from David@VeritasPrep - GMAT Instructor

"This question is from the October 1993 LSAT the first Logical Reasoning Section, number 11.

This is a method of reasoning question, it asks you to describe how the argument proceeds. This is a type of question that does appear on the GMAT and is one of the "m"s in the Veritas SWIMMER method.

Method of reasoning questions are some of the best questions to study to improve your overall critical reasoning skills. They help you to understand how arguments are structured - how they are supposed to lead to their conclusion.

You can start this type of question as you would any "normal' - meaning not inference and paradox. So start by identifying the conclusion. In this case the conclusion comes at the very beginning of the argument. This would be rare for a GMAT question! So the conclusion is

"Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the evolutionary
theory that dinosaurs are more closely related to reptiles than to
other classes of animals."

Now we want to look to the evidence for this conclusion. The rest of the passage is really the evidence - several examples of things that are not true of present-day reptiles and are true of present day birds and other warm-blooded animals.

So that is what the argument is doing - arguing for a conclusion about a type of animal that is long extinct by comparing that type to two current types of animals.

This is what answer choice E says, "presenting evidence that a past phenomenon is more similar to one
rather than the other of two present-day phenomena." Please do not get caught up in the term phenomenon. On the GMAT and the LSAT the word phenomenon has very little real meaning - it only means a thing or an event.

In this case the past phenomenon is dinosaurs and the present phenomena are warm-blooded creatures and cold-blooded creatures".

He made the analysis so simple

Kudos [?]: 2 [1], given: 122

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4285

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2004, 00:55
E for me too
phenomena according to Webster dictionary: an observable fact or event
In this case, the past fact would be "dinosaurs" and the present two facts would be "reptiles" and "birds"
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1788

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Location: NewJersey USA
Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2004, 07:37
I feel D is convincing. I could not understand E but Paul's explanation is very nice.

The argument says that recently discovered fossil evidence ( of one dinosaur ) is more similar to birds than to any other aninal. If a generalization has to be made then it is necessary to assume that if one animal belongs to a catagory and all the animals with same characteristics must also belong to the same catagory.

Can any one refute this please...

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 50

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

Location: Singapore
Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2004, 08:38
Let me try to refute..

A snake is a reptile which bites.

Characteristic being "it bites".

A dog bit the boy.

=> Dog is a reptile ?

Specifically, with re to the choice D, draw two sets P (Mbr of same category) and Q (property), with Q as a superset of P.
All P is Q..but all Q is not P.

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

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1788

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Location: NewJersey USA
Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2004, 08:48
hi ashwyn,

We are not debating whether the argument is wrong or right. The Q is asking how does the argument proceed.

Anand.

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 50

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

Location: Singapore
Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2004, 09:19
[quote="anandnk"]I feel D is convincing. I could not understand E but Paul's explanation is very nice.

The argument says that recently discovered fossil evidence ( of one dinosaur ) is more similar to birds than to any other aninal. If a generalization has to be made then it is necessary to assume that if one animal belongs to a catagory and all the animals with same characteristics must also belong to the same catagory.

Can any one refute this please...[/quote]

Anand,

Pls read Option D again. There is a slight difference between ur statement above and choice D.

Choice D says- if ALL members of a category have a certain property then ALL THINGS with that property belong to the category

What u have stated is a REQD and necessary assumption, but this is not what is stated in Choice D.

Ur interpretatioin- if ONE animal belongs to a catagory and ALL animals with same characteristics must also belong to the same catagory.
is perfectly true and necessary.

Pls let me knw if the above is unclear or u dont agree. Tks.

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

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1788

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Location: NewJersey USA
Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2004, 09:52
Hi Ashwyn

I will give it to you. I guess D has a flaw in itself.
More importantly the author is giving evidence. I believe E makes more sense. I just thought properties of birds cannot be called the phenomenon.

Anand.

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Posts: 155

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Location: New York
Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2004, 10:45
I like the explanations you guys gave, but I think I'd go with B on this one, if I saw this Q on the exam. My reasoning:

If the author states that the Din. are not closely related to Reptiles, he must show why previous claims were made about the similarity of Din and Reptiles. Also, one might question the evolution of present day reptiles, what were they like back during the times of evolution. Similarly, while the author demonstrates with examples that D had many characteristics of birds and other warm blooded animals, I am still not sure what the previous claims were based on. Maybe Din breath like birds, have hollow bones and so on, but they are still more closely related to Reptiles. E is most definitely a convincing statement, but I still believe that the author establishes a principle--dinosaurs cant be resmble reptiles-b/c they have many carachteristics of warm blooded animals, which is not true Din can still belong to the reptile family. Cat's breath thru mouth, and do many other things like dogs, yet they dont belong to the canine family. Anyway, thats my take on it. Feel free to correct any flaws in my reasoninig.

Needed a little editing. This question is really tough in my opinion, and I REALLY dont like the "general principle" phrase, unless we can assume that the first statement can be called a general principle, which is what I did.
_________________

---------------------------------------------------
The more I learn, the more I realize I know nothing!
----------------------------------------------------

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4285

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2004, 11:21
lvb9th wrote:
but I still believe that the author establishes a principle--dinosaurs cant be resmble reptiles-b/c they have many carachteristics of warm blooded animals

Is this really what you call a principle or is it just a mere claim the author is trying to prove?
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Posts: 155

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Location: New York
Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2004, 11:51
Paul wrote:
lvb9th wrote:
but I still believe that the author establishes a principle--dinosaurs cant be resmble reptiles-b/c they have many carachteristics of warm blooded animals

Is this really what you call a principle or is it just a mere claim the author is trying to prove?

Paul,

I agree with E, but I am still not sure why B is wrong, if it is. Yes, I was a little hesistant to call it a principle. Id like to see the official explanation. The core of my reasoning was that, while it is possible that Din resemble Birds, we still dont know, but it is possible that Din have greater similarity with Reptiles. If that is a phenomenon, then I would agree with E. But using the same reasoning, we could call a hundred of accepted principles a phenomenon. There are many birds that can't fly, but we still classify them as birds, is that a phenomenon? Hmm, maybe I am taking it too far, or even in the wrong direction.
_________________

---------------------------------------------------
The more I learn, the more I realize I know nothing!
----------------------------------------------------

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 03 Jul 2003
Posts: 651

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 0

Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2004, 17:17

Sorry, there is no official explanation.

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10118

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jun 2016, 10:05
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Re: Recently discovered fossil evidence casts doubt on the   [#permalink] 28 Jun 2016, 10:05
Display posts from previous: Sort by