Scientists have been puzzled by the seeming disparity between models

SajjadAhmad ,GMATNinja and other experts

I dont know whether this will be a vague question to ask, however here it is:
I took for this passage 7 mins to solve (which i generally take for long passage with 3 or 4 questions)
1st question along with reading and solving - Time took- 5 mins 33 secs.
I know this is too much for this short passage and the passage seemed not that hard too(owing to my science background , may be). However i noticed that i kinda lost in between the too many wavering of two Sceintists' claim and observations about the cooling effect in Northern and southern hemisphere. I cannot take notes while reading (which is my weakness because of the distraction). Hence not taking notes while read through, it was difficult for me as what two scientist were really in agreement and disagreement.
And then the first question just shoot me in the head giving me the exact question of my confusion. However i managed and got it correct.

The second question was again related to the same misunderstanding and thats why i took 1 min 53 secs . Because i kinda reread the whole passage again (superficially this time)

The third question took me 19 secs to answer.

So my dilemma is , What went wrong and how can i tackle this too much "on and off" opinions wherein one says it is like this however finally says the otherwise , whereas the other says it is like this and then finally conclude the other way around.

I hope i am not too vague in this questions to ask. Can i have answer to tackle this kind of "Frequent change and puzzling opinions of authors" based passage.

Thanks

Can some expert please explain Michael's line of reasoning in Para 1. I am unable to reason how did he reach to his ultimate conclusion that "the models may be flawed"

I understood what his observations were but cannot understand how did he establish the conclusion.

Thanks in advance

Hi Laksh

It is established early on in the passage that the actual warming is different from the extent of warming predicted by the models ("the world is not warming up as much as these models have predicted"). Michael initially postulated that this was due to sulphate cooling. However, since this theory is contradicted by actual data of the northern and southern hemispheres, Michael has begun to doubt the theory.

This does not change the fact that the models are not accurately predicting the actual warming - it is only that one of the explanations proposed has failed. Therefore, in order to explain the divergence between the models and the actuals, Michael felt that the models themselves were incorrect (no other supporting evidence for this is presented in the passage).

Hope this clarifies.

This is a try passage, and quite a bit to grap quickly, but if you read the passage structure you will notice that it is of the form ( A -> Has a theory (and provides reasons) , and B -> disputes that theory (and provides reasons).

1. The passage suggests that, in the early 1990s, Michaels would have been most likely to agree with which of the following statements about the disparity mentioned in lines 3-4?

This is a tricky question, all answers are almost similar so we need to analyze each answer choice in detail.
Since the question stem says the passage suggests (answer is directly in the passage).
What we find is: In the early 1990s, Pat
Michaels sought to explain this disparity, suggesting
that sulfate emissions in industrial areas had a cooling
effect, thus temporarily retarding global warming (notice the key word temporarily)

A. This disparity is relatively less extreme in the Northern Hemisphere because of sulfate cooling.
Incorrect - Makes it seem that its final, and this is how its always going to be
B. This disparity is only a short-term phenomenon brought about by sulfate cooling.
Correct - Short term <- > Temporarily
C. This disparity is most significant in those parts of the world dominated by oceans.
Incorrect - Ben brings this up in the third paragraph
D. The extent of this disparity is being masked by the temporary effect of sulfate cooling.
Incorrect - Might be a trap ( we are not focused on the disparaty being masked, we talking about what causes the disparity)
E. The disparity confirms that current models of global warming are correct.
Incorrect - The passage states the opposite

2. According to the passage, Santer asserts which of the following about global warming?
Look in the passage for the right answer. In the passage we find:
Santer contends that, in
general, global warming occurs more slowly in the
south because this hemisphere is dominated by
oceans, which warm more slowly than the landmasses
that dominate the Northern Hemisphere. But,
according to Santer, the situation remains complicated
by sulfate cooling, which peaked in the north in the
mid-twentieth century

A. It will become a more serious problem in the Southern Hemisphere than in the Northern Hemisphere in spite of the cooling influence of oceans in the south.
Incorrect - The passage states otherwise

B. It is unlikely to be a serious problem in the future because of the pervasive effect of sulfate cooling.
Incorrect - The passage doesnt state this

C. It will proceed at the same general rate in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres once the temporary influence of sulfate cooling comes to an end.
Incorrect - The passage doesnt state this

D. Until the late 1980s, it was moderated in the Northern Hemisphere by the effect of sulfate cooling.
Correct - The passage states this

E. Largely because of the cooling influence of oceans, it has had no discernible impact on the Southern Hemisphere.
Incorrect - Trap, the passage states that it warmed a lot more slower in the souther hemisphere than in the northern nor that it had no discernible impact

3. The passage suggests that Santer and Michaels would be most likely to DISAGREE over which of the following issues?
Again: The answer is in the passage.
Last sentence:
Thus, Santer
disputes Michaels’s claim that model predictions and
observed data differ fundamentally.

A. Whether climatological data invalidates global warming models
Correct - Stated
B. Whether warming in the Northern Hemisphere has intensified since 1987
Incorrect
C. Whether disparities between global warming models and climatological data can be detected
Incorrect

D. Whether landmasses warm more rapidly than oceans
Incorrect

E. Whether oceans have a significant effect on global climate patterns
Incorrect

The author first notes that the world is not warming up as much as models have predicted. Initially, Michaels does not fault the models but blames sulfate emissions for the discrepancy and suggests that the emissions had “temporarily retard(ed) global warming.”

In other words, he expects that the models will end up being correct in the end, but they just failed to consider sulfate cooling. But after revealing that the Southern Hemisphere is not warming as fast as would be expected, Michaels concludes that sulfate cooling is likely not occurring. And because sulfate cooling cannot explain the discrepancy between the models and the observed data, the models must be flawed.

I hope that helps!

I have a question related question#1 - question stem says

The passage suggests that, in the early 1990s, Michaels would have been most likely to agree with which of the following statements about the disparity mentioned in lines 3-4?

In passage, it was not mentioned when Michaels started doubted his idea. So, what will be the scope of this question?
Should the scope of the answer is before Michaels started doubting his idea, or it can go beyond that?

Also, why option A is incorrect in question#1

Hi Soham68,

For Question 2,


Consider the lines: " In the early 1990s, Pat Michaels sought to explain this disparity, suggesting that sulfate emissions in industrial areas had a cooling (10)effect, thus temporarily retarding global warming. Michaels later came to doubt this idea, however, Northern Hemisphere, its cooling influence should be largely limited to that hemisphere.Yet, since 1987, (15) warming in the Southern Hemisphere, which had been relatively intense, has virtually ceased, while warming in the north has accelerated. Thus, Michaels not only doubted the idea of sulfate cooling, but came to feel that global warming models themselves may be(20)flawed."

What was perceived: sulfate emissions in industrial areas had a cooling effect, thus, temporarily retarding global warming. But what Michaels later found that warming in the Southern Hemisphere, which had been relatively intense, has virtually ceased, while warming in the north has accelerated, implying that cooling effect due to sulfate emissions was not retarding the global warming. Thus Michaels not only doubted the idea but also felt the models to be flawed. Thus A is clearly incorrect, as it's opposite of what is mentioned in the passage.

Thus B is the most appropriate answer.

Hope This Helps.
Thanks.

Question 1

Take a look at the relevant section of the passage:

"In the early 1990s, Pat Michaels sought to explain this disparity, suggesting that sulfate emissions in industrial areas had a cooling effect, thus temporarily retarding global warming. Michaels later came to doubt this idea..."

From this, we know that Michaels made a certain suggestion in the early 1990s. Then we learn that he "later" came to doubt this idea. This means that Michaels doubts occurred after the 1990s. So, to answer question 1, we're looking for an option that corresponds to Michaels' initial suggestion in the early 1990s.

Would the early 1990s Michaels agree with (A) for question 1?

The passage discusses a disparity between global warming models and actual climate data. The actual data showed that the world wasn't warming up as fast as the models predicted.

In the early 1990s, Michaels explained this disparity by saying that sulfate emissions temporarily slow down warming. What did the early-90s Michaels think about cooling in the northern vs southern hemisphere? We have no idea -- the issue with the hemispheres isn't discussed until we learn about his "later" doubts.

This "later" Michaels points out that the south actually had slower warming than the north, which is directly contrary to what (A) tells us. We really can't conclude from this that the early-90s Michaels would agree with the information in (A) -- it could be that he hadn't considered hemispheres at all in the early 1990s.

(A) is out.

Compare that to (B):

The early-90s Michaels believed that sulfate emissions "temporarily" slowed down warming. So, he would agree that the disparity was a short-term issue caused by sulfate emissions.

(A) is the correct answer to question 1.

I hope that helps!

VeritasKarishma
Hi ma'am,
How santer disputed michael's claim ?
Thank you.

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.