GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 17 Oct 2018, 01:04

### 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

# The impact of a large meteor nearly 65 million years ago can better ac

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

SVP
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1712
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
The impact of a large meteor nearly 65 million years ago can better ac  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2018, 03:35
2
6
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

44% (02:31) correct 56% (02:21) wrong based on 362 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The impact of a large meteor nearly 65 million years ago can better account for the series of cataclysmic events attending the extinction of the dinosaurs than can the concomitant changes in the Earth’s climate alone, based on the fact that the meteorite can best explain the sudden appearance of high concentrations of the element iridium, which is found in meteors and, in and of itself, in no way related to changes in the terrestrial climate.

A in the Earth’s climate alone, based on the fact that the meteorite can best explain the sudden appearance of high concentrations of the element iridium, which is found in meteors

B in the Earth’s climate alone—changes that can best be explained by the sudden appearance of high concentrations in iridium, an element that is found in meteors

C to the climate of the Earth, and this best explains the sudden appearance of iridium, an element in high concentrations in meteors
in the Earth’s climate alone

D in the Earth’s climate alone; the former best explains the sudden appearance of high concentrations of iridium, an element found in meteors

E to the Earth’s climate alone and that the impact can best explain the sudden appearance of high concentrations of iridium in meteors, an element found
Manager
Joined: 01 Jun 2015
Posts: 219
Location: India
GMAT 1: 620 Q48 V26
Re: The impact of a large meteor nearly 65 million years ago can better ac  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2018, 06:08
3
+1 D

This question has a 3:2 initial split.That is changes in vs changes to.We definitely choose changes in cause that is the right way to express.So,C and E are out.

Now among A,B and D

A in the Earth’s climate alone, based on the fact that the meteorite can best explain the sudden appearance of high concentrations of the element iridium, which is found in meteors-This sentence is unnecessary wordy and not consice. And meteorite can best explain is weird,its actually the impact of the meteorite and its consequence that explains.

B in the Earth’s climate alone—changes that can best be explained by the sudden appearance of high concentrations in iridium, an element that is found in meteors-Totally changes the meaning.Implies that the later event is responsible for the high concentration of iridium.

D in the Earth’s climate alone; the former best explains the sudden appearance of high concentrations of iridium, an element found in meteors-Perfectly written and hence,the right answer.
Manager
Joined: 08 Jan 2018
Posts: 240
Location: United States (ID)
GPA: 3.33
WE: Accounting (Accounting)
Re: The impact of a large meteor nearly 65 million years ago can better ac  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2018, 10:24
A in the Earth’s climate alone, based on the fact that the meteorite can best explain the sudden appearance of high concentrations of the element iridium, which is found in meteors

B in the Earth’s climate alone—changes that can best be explained by the sudden appearance of high concentrations in iridium, an element that is found in meteors -> passive verb, change the subject and meaning from explanation to "change", wordy, and "that is" can be redundant

C to the climate of the Earth, and this best explains the sudden appearance of iridium, an element in high concentrations in meteors in the Earth’s climate alone

D in the Earth’s climate alone; the former best explains the sudden appearance of high concentrations of iridium, an element found in meteors

E to the Earth’s climate alone and that the impact can best explain the sudden appearance of high concentrations of iridium in meteors, an element found
SC Moderator
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1213
The impact of a large meteor nearly 65 million years ago can better ac  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 May 2018, 07:43

MAGOOSH OE:

We can eliminate (A) because of a few suspect things, which, in of themselves, are not sufficient to make this answer choice incorrect.
1) based on the fact = wordy
A far more concise way of saying this is “because”
2) the sudden appearance of high concentrations of the element iridium
This is by no means wrong, but is a little awkward. You should never hinge your answer on something like this, but notice how much less awkward the phrasing is in (B) and (D).
What makes (A) clearly wrong is there is a clear violation of parallelism. This is much harder to see, however, because part of the parallelism issue comes at the very end of the sentence, in the non-underlined part.
“which IS found in meteors and… in no way related”
It should be as follows:
“which IS found in meteors and IS in no way related”
However, this exact construction is not found. Instead, we have some less than idealized parallelism: an element found in meteors and…in no way related to….
The GMAT is known to sometimes choose such a construction in the credited response. In other words, the GMAT doesn’t always choose the most ideal way of expressing something in a correct answer. But as long as it isn’t grammatically wrong or a poor taste in style (this is a lot more fuzzy), a phrase like the one above can be part of a correct answer.
(B) is also subtle. By placing an em-dash and the word “changes”, the sentence implies that climatic changes can be explained by iridium. This not only changes the original meaning but clashes with the non-underlined part at the end of the sentence.
Eliminate (B).
(C) is wrong because the “this” is vague. Dropping the “found” makes for an awkward construction.
Eliminate (C).
(D) maintains the not-perfect but not incorrect parallelism “an element found in meteors and, in and of itself, in no way related to changes in the terrestrial climate.”
Both underlined parts correctly modify element.
The semicolon correctly separates two independent clauses. The “former” clearly refers to the impact of the meteor and not the changes in climate. True, the “impact” in (E) is more succinct, though (E) has several clear flaws.
Given this dirty grab bag of tricks, this question is pretty close to an 800-level question.
(E) is clearly wrong because “an element” modifies “meteors”, and “meteors” are not an element.
_________________

Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases

The impact of a large meteor nearly 65 million years ago can better ac &nbs [#permalink] 19 May 2018, 07:43
Display posts from previous: Sort by