Samples from the floor of a rock shelter in Pennsylvania were dated

Question

Samples from the floor of a rock shelter in Pennsylvania were dated by analyzing the carbon they contained. The dates assigned to samples associated with human activities formed a consistent series, beginning with the present and going back in time, a series that was correlated with the depth from which the samples came. The oldest and deepest sample was dated at 19,650 years before the present, plus or minus 2,400 years. Skeptics, viewing that date as too early and inconsistent with the accepted date of human migration into North America, suggested that the samples could have been contaminated by dissolved old carbon carried by percolating groundwater from nearby coal deposits.

Which one of the following considerations, if true, argues most strongly against the suggestion of the skeptics?

A. No likely mechanism of contamination involving percolating groundwater would have affected the deeper samples from the site without affecting the uppermost sample.

B. Not every application of the carbon-dating procedure has led to results that have been generally acceptable to scientists.

C. There is no evidence that people were using coal for fuel at any time when the deepest layer might have been laid down.

D. No sample in the series, when retested by the carbon-dating procedure, was assigned an earlier date than that assigned to a sample from a layer above it.

E. No North American site besides the one in Pennsylvania has ever yielded a sample to which the carbon-dating procedure assigned a date that was comparably ancient.

Source: LSAT

GMATNinja · Accepted Answer

There are literally many layers to this passage, so let's take the time to break it all down.

Skeptics suggest  that samples associated with human activities could have been contaminated by dissolved old carbon carried by percolating groundwater from nearby coal deposits.

Here's how they arrived at this suggestion (i.e., conclusion):

Samples from the rock shelter floor were carbon-dated. 
  For samples associated with human activities, the assigned dates formed a consistent series. 
  This series starts with the present day and goes back in time. The deeper the sample, the earlier the date of that sample. 
  The oldest, deepest sample is dated at 19,650 years before present day (+/- 2,400 years). 
  Skeptics believe that this date is too early to accept, because it doesn't match the accepted date of human migration into North America. 
  Skeptics therefore suggest that the samples could have been contaminated -- specifically via percolating groundwater, which theoretically dissolved old carbon from nearby coal deposits, then carried that carbon into the rock shelter floor.

We're looking for the choice that most weakens the skeptics' suggestion that these samples have been contaminated by old carbon in percolating groundwater. We can't really challenge the accepted date of human migration to North America. And the claim that the samples were contaminated is really the heart of the skeptics' suggestion, so the potential means of contamination is especially open to question. Let's work our way through the answer choices.

Hmmm, not bad! The skeptics are reacting to the oldest and deepest sample. Since they don't agree with the date assigned to that sample, they're suggesting that the samples as a whole could have been contaminated by percolating groundwater.

But according to the passage, the top-layer sample dates to the present day. This dating of the top layer isn't called into question by anyone, not even the skeptics. So if (A) is true, then there's no way the samples could have been contaminated by percolating groundwater. (A) says that if this type of contamination had happened, then old carbon would have contaminated the top layer as well, and top-layer samples would NOT have been dated with the present day.

Consequently, if (A) is true, then it's very unlikely that the mechanism of contamination named by skeptics (percolating groundwater) was the cause of this unusually early date in the deepest sample. (A) isn't a watertight argument killer, but it knocks back the skeptics' reasoning in a very direct way. So let's keep this choice around.

Huh? What do the general opinions of scientists have to do with this particular series, this particular sample, this particular date, and these particular skeptics? Choice (B) doesn't come close to addressing the conclusion that we're trying to weaken, so eliminate it.

We don't care whether coal was ever being used for fuel. Unless there's some concrete connection between the uses of coal and the ways that coal could have contaminated these rock samples, then what people have done with coal is irrelevant. Eliminate (C).

Choice (D) is one of those options that  sounds good  but really says nothing at all. The passage already tells us that the order of dates in the series was consistent. This choice repeats the same fact in different wording. If (D) is true, we haven't learned anything new, and aren't closer to understanding why the deepest, earliest sample seems to be dated with a year that's  too far in the past . So we'll eliminate (D), too.

Like choice (B), this choice points us to information that's way outside the scope of this argument and has very little to do with the specific conclusion we've been asked to weaken. If anything, this information would make us slightly more likely to believe the skeptics, because it tells us that this weird date truly is an outlier. So we'll get rid of (E).

(A) is the only choice that directly addresses the logic presented by the skeptics, then offers information to cast doubt on that logic. None of the other choices come close, so even if we're getting to (A) solely through elimination, it's the best choice available.

I hope this helps! (...specifically, I hope this helps you rock the GMAT? Haha. Yeah, I know: my puns are getting worse.)

sobby · Answer

A and C seems as weakener ..but we are not concerned about the usage of coal ..coal can be there without being used by any civilization ...that eliminates C 
A is best among lot ..that says because of percolating ground water ,all the layer would have been equally effected .....not only last layer ..

unraveled · Answer

Samples from the floor of a rock shelter in Pennsylvania were dated by analyzing the carbon they contained. The dates assigned to samples associated with human activities formed a consistent series, beginning with the present and going back in time, a series that was correlated with the depth from which the samples came. The oldest and deepest sample was dated at 19,650 years before the present, plus or minus 2,400 years. Skeptics, viewing that date as too early and inconsistent with the accepted date of human migration into North America, suggested that the samples could have been contaminated by dissolved old carbon carried by percolating groundwater from nearby coal deposits.

Which one of the following considerations, if true, argues most strongly against the suggestion of the skeptics?

A. No likely mechanism of contamination involving percolating groundwater would have affected the deeper samples from the site without affecting the uppermost sample. - CORRECT. At first look, it looks to support but it actually does not.

B.  Not every application of the carbon-dating procedure  has led to results that have been generally acceptable to scientists. - WRONG. True but does not affect the passage.

C. There is  no evidence that people were using coal for fuel at any time  when the deepest layer might have been laid down. - WRONG. Touches slightly the core aspect but with an approach that we are not concerned about. Since contamination is not dealt with, this is wrong.

D. No sample in the series,  when retested by the carbon-dating procedure , was assigned an earlier date than that assigned to a sample from a layer above it. - WRONG.

E.  No North American site besides the one in Pennsylvania  has ever yielded a sample to which the carbon-dating procedure assigned a date that was comparably ancient. - WRONG.

POE helps in this one.

Answer A.

BongBideshini · Answer

GMATNinja 
 MartyMurray 
 KarishmaB

I chose the correct answer choice A. But not able to decode D. Maybe I interpreted it incorrectly. Here "earlier dates" mean what? If no sample of the deeper layer was assigned "earlier date" (older date) than the above layer, is it not contracting the correlation ?
Can anybody explain D?

guddo · Answer

Samples from the floor of a rock shelter in Pennsylvania were dated by analyzing the carbon they contained. The dates assigned to samples associated with human activities formed a consistent series, beginning with the present and going back in time, a series that was correlated with the depth from which the samples came. The oldest and deepest sample was dated at 19,650 years before the present, plus or minus 2,400 years. Skeptics, viewing that date as too early and inconsistent with the accepted date of human migration into North America, suggested that the samples could have been contaminated by dissolved old carbon carried by percolating groundwater from nearby coal deposits.
 
 Which one of the following considerations, if true, argues most strongly against the suggestion of the skeptics?

The skeptics claim that groundwater carrying old carbon from coal deposits contaminated the samples and made them seem older than they really are.  To weaken that suggestion , we need evidence that this kind of groundwater contamination would not explain the dating pattern, especially the fact that the upper samples dated close to the present while deeper samples dated much older.

A. No likely mechanism of contamination involving percolating groundwater would have affected the deeper samples from the site without affecting the uppermost sample.

Correct. If groundwater contamination could not affect only the deeper samples, then the uppermost sample should also have been contaminated by old carbon. But the dates form a series beginning with the present, so the uppermost sample was not made artificially ancient. This strongly weakens the contamination explanation.

B. Not every application of the carbon-dating procedure has led to results that have been generally acceptable to scientists.

Wrong. This casts doubt on carbon dating generally, so it does not argue against the skeptics.

C. There is no evidence that people were using coal for fuel at any time when the deepest layer might have been laid down.

Wrong. The skeptics are not saying people used coal. They are saying groundwater carried old carbon from nearby coal deposits.

D. No sample in the series, when retested by the carbon-dating procedure, was assigned an earlier date than that assigned to a sample from a layer above it.

Tempting, but weaker. This supports the consistency of the dating order, but contamination could still theoretically preserve an old-to-young pattern by depth. It does not attack the groundwater explanation as directly as A does.

E. No North American site besides the one in Pennsylvania has ever yielded a sample to which the carbon-dating procedure assigned a date that was comparably ancient.

Wrong. This actually makes the skeptics’ concern more understandable, because the date is unusually old.

Answer: (A)

MartyMurray · Answer

(D) does indeed contradict the information provided in the passage. So, basically, (D) seems to align with the skeptics' position that the date is too early.

I think maybe a mistake sneaked through the editing process when this LSAT question was created.

KarishmaB · Answer

Yes, it is conflicting with the premises given. 
Premises: Deeper samples were older. 
Option (D): No deeper samples were older than samples above them.

Since it's directly against the given 'facts,' it is irrelevant. Sometimes you may have options that contradict the facts given. Those options do not weaken the conclusion of the author (or the skeptics). We do take the facts to be true. They are irrelevant to the argument. Because of the wording used, this option seems to be relevant and hence confuses the test taker. That is the only purpose it serves here.

Samples from the floor of a rock shelter in Pennsylvania were dated

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Samples from the floor of a rock shelter in Pennsylvania were dated

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards