jabhatta2 wrote:
Hi
AndrewN - on question 3 - not sure how to eliminate (b) unfortunately. This line is really making me believe perhaps (b) is an answer. Curious on how one can eliminate (B)
Quote:
... Moreover, Twigg disputes the traditional trade-ship explanation for plague transmissions by extrapolating from data on the number of dead rats aboard Nile sailing vessels in 1912.
I made the following 3 inferences with the above line in red
- there were dead rats on ships (ships, that sailed the river : Nile)
- Based on the number of dead rats on these ships specifically, the plague could not have originated from these trade-ships
- If the rats survived instead on these trade ships -- the traditional explanation (that the plague originated from trade-ships) would be more a **bit more likely** to be true.
So i selected (B)
jabhatta2 wrote:
AndrewN^^
Is (b) wrong because
(i) we cant assume that these rats succumbed to the plague themselves - Maybe the rats died on these ships based on sea sickness or lack of food
(ii) (B) makes logical sense but isnt mentioned or inferred per the passage per se
Hello,
jabhatta2. If I had taken this passage before, it was not through this site, so I saw your query and did the only responsible thing I could think to do: I read the passage and completed the question set. If you are curious, I went six for six, but my timing is by no means superhuman: 3:26 (including reading), 1:13, 0:52, 0:24, 1:57, 2:34. Those last two questions I wanted to really think through before committing to an answer, based on some of my earlier experiences blowing through a set of questions and missing one, typically toward the end. Anyway, since the passage is fresh on my mind, I feel primed to answer your queries. How about we look at the question for context?
Quote:
3) The passage suggests that Twigg believes that rats could not have spread the Black Death unless which of the following were true?
(A) The rats escaped from ships that had been in Asia.
(B) The rats were immune to the diseases that they carried.
(C) The rat population was larger in medieval Europe than Twigg believes it actually was.
(D) The rat population primarily infested densely populated areas.
(E) The rats interacted with other animals that Twigg believes could have carried plague.
We need to determine why Twigg does not believe that rats spread the Black Death. Our answer must come from paragraph three. What information do we find on rats, in relation to the question?
Quote:
zoologist Graham Twigg employs urban case studies suggesting that the rat population in Europe was both too sparse and insufficiently migratory to have spread plague. Moreover, Twigg disputes the traditional trade-ship explanation for plague transmissions by extrapolating from data on the number of dead rats aboard Nile sailing vessels in 1912. The Black Death, which he conjectures was anthrax instead of bubonic plague, therefore caused far less havoc and fewer deaths than historians typically claim.
Okay, so I can see a few reasonable answers, based on just how closely the GMAT™ likes an inference to stem from stated information:
1) if
the rat population in Europe was... too sparse, then it would need to have been larger;
2) if
the rat population in Europe was... insufficiently migratory, then it would need to have been more migratory;
3) if
data on the number of dead rats... were different (although we cannot say how, exactly, even if we would want to keep 1) and 2) in mind), then
the traditional trade-ship explanation for plague transmissions would be more tenable.
From where would we glean any information on rats and immunity to diseases? I see nothing of the sort in paragraph three. So, your reservations above are warranted. Indeed, we cannot speculate on the cause(s) of death of the rats in question, and we need to have textual evidence, not speculation with a dash of logic, to back up our answer. Meanwhile, option (C) touches directly on 1) above, and we should have a much harder time disputing it than any other option.
Of course, I see that
GMATNinja has written much of the same above, in
this post. But I do not feel as though I have wasted my time. Sometimes it is good for the community to see the same lines of reasoning repeated, and sometimes it is good to see a slightly different take on the same material, even if the thought process leads to the same conclusion.
Thank you for thinking to ask, and good luck with your studies.
- Andrew
close
10 May 2021, 02:30
