Standard archaeological techniques make it possible to determine the a

Argument : Therefore, it is not possible to determine the age of prehistoric paintings on limestone using standard archaeological techniques.

(A) There exist several different techniques for collecting samples of prehistoric pigments on limestone.

(B) Laboratory procedures exist that can remove all the limestone from a sample of prehistoric paint on limestone.

(C) The age of the limestone itself can be determined from samples that contain no vegetable-based paint.

(D) Prehistoric artists did not use anything other than vegetable matter to make their paints. OUT OF SCOPE

(E) The proportion of carbon to other elements in limestone is the same in all samples of limestone. OUT OF SCOPE

OA B

Hi!
Could someone explain why the answer is not C?
My thought is that if we calculate the age of the limestone alone, and then calculate the age of the drawing, the scientists can calculate the age of the drawing.

Could someone explain what is the flaw on my thought?

How will you calculate the age of drawing? This technique is itself a way to determine the age of drawing. How do you do that? By analysing the age of vegetable paint. Condition? It should be free of minerals containing carbon.

The argument stem says that in a painting the vegetable paint & limestone (mineral that contains carbon) cannot be separated and hence the age of painting cannot be determined.

B is correct since it gives us a technique which can separate limestone from the vegetable paint.

It might be that paint on that limestone is made after many years after that limestone came into existence. Hence only with computing the age of limestone you cannot be sure of the age of the paint.

Regards,

DB

Standard archaeological techniques make it possible to determine the age of anything containing vegetable matter, but only if the object is free of minerals containing carbon. Prehistoric artists painted on limestone with pigments composed of vegetable matter, but it is impossible to collect samples of this prehistoric paint without removing limestone, a mineral containing carbon, with the paint. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the age of prehistoric paintings on limestone using standard archaeological techniques.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) There exist several different techniques for collecting samples of prehistoric pigments on limestone. - WRONG. Techniques matter but whether they are helpful or not is not known.

(B) Laboratory procedures exist that can remove all the limestone from a sample of prehistoric paint on limestone. - CORRECT. With no limestone present the SATs would be able to determine the age of paint.

(C) The age of the limestone itself can be determined from samples that contain no vegetable-based paint. - WRONG. Limestone mightbe a billion years old but a paint might be a few million or few hundred thousand years old or less.

(D) Prehistoric artists did not use anything other than vegetable matter to make their paints. - WRONG. Irrelevant.

(E) The proportion of carbon to other elements in limestone is the same in all samples of limestone. - WRONG. Proportion is irrelevant.

Answer B.

GMATNinja can you explain how option choice B is correct? Because even if B is true, then it strengthen's our conclusion that SAT cannot help determine the age as we had to get outside help of another procedure to determine the age of prehistoric paintings on limestone. Would look forward to knowing your thoughts. I think option B could have been better worded, sure it is the best out of the worst options.