It is currently 21 Oct 2017, 05:24

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# The true scientific significance of a group of unusual

Author Message
Director
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 584

Kudos [?]: 280 [0], given: 0

The true scientific significance of a group of unusual [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 May 2005, 17:30
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (03:55) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

22. The true scientific significance of a group of unusual fossils discovered by the paleontologist Charles Walcott is more likely to be reflected in a recent classification than it was in Walcottâ€™s own classification. Walcott was, after all, a prominent member of the scientific establishment. His classifications are thus unlikely to have done anything but confirm what established science had already taken to be true.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a questionable technique used in the argument?

(A) It draws conclusions about the merit of a position and about the content of that position from evidence about the positionâ€™s source.
(B) It cites two pieces of evidence, each of which is both questionable and unverifiable, and uses this evidence to support its conclusions.
(C) It bases a conclusion on two premises that contradict each other and minimizes this contradiction by the vagueness of the terms employed.
(D) It attempts to establish the validity of a claim, which is otherwise unsupported, by denying the truth of the opposite of that claim.
(E) It analyzes the past on the basis of social and political categories that properly apply only to the present and uses the results of this analysis to support its conclusion.

Kudos [?]: 280 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 1708

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

18 May 2005, 21:10
go with A..

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 04 Apr 2005
Posts: 7

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

18 May 2005, 23:14
Th way the argument is structed is : A claim is made . An evidence is presented a questionable conclusion is drawn from the eviedence to support the claim .

A: Source of the position : Recent classication more signifacnt has not been discussed

B : is wrong as there is only only eviedence, and that is neither questionable nor unverifiable.

C: There are no two premises which contradict each other.

D:Opposite of the claim is walcotts own classifiaction is significant. Has given evidence and concluded that this is not the case . So D seems right.

E:Social and political..looks like out of the scope.

based on the eveidence given above ( a la CR style ) I conclude that D is the correct answer.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 16 Oct 2004
Posts: 43

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 May 2005, 06:29
D seems to be correct

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 84

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 May 2005, 07:00
Definitely A

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 555

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 May 2005, 09:27
(A) for me

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 330

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 12

### Show Tags

19 May 2005, 09:34
A for me

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 12

Director
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 584

Kudos [?]: 280 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

24 May 2005, 07:19
The OA is A.

Kudos [?]: 280 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 896

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

24 May 2005, 07:48
It's between A and D, I pick A.

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2004
Posts: 453

Kudos [?]: 126 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

24 May 2005, 10:45
A.

Because Charles Walcott was a prominent member of science establishment, his classification cannot be new and innovative, so the recent classification of fossils is more significant.

Kudos [?]: 126 [0], given: 0

24 May 2005, 10:45
Display posts from previous: Sort by