Study of the soil from the craters on Moon showed the existence of cry

Question

Study of the soil from the craters on Moon showed the existence of crystalline graphite identical to the crystalline graphite on the floor of the Atlantic Ocean. Moreover, this crystalline graphite is not found on the rest of the surface of the Moon. Researchers claim that this finding is evidence that supports the existing theory that the Moon initially separated from the earth as a lump of mass. In addition, they hypothesize that the moon's current surface is formed by the accumulation of multiple layers of space dust covering the previous surface.

Which of the following would be useful in evaluating the researchers' claim regarding the usage of the finding as evidence?

A. Whether soil samples from every crater on Moon have been studied.
B. Whether crystalline graphite has been found on Earth's Continental surface.
C. Whether the researchers have studied the core of the Moon along with its surface.
﻿﻿D. Whether the Moon could have been formed from a separate planetary mass other than the Earth.
E. Whether the composition of other substances in the Moon crater soil samples is significantly different from that in the soil of the Atlantic Ocean floor.

Sakshi2013 · Answer

Hi Folks,
First and foremost, apologies; this is my first post on the club. I am unable to change the difficulty level. It should be 605+. I would appreciate it if any one of you could help me fix it. Thanks in advance!

Spectre26 · Answer

Conclusion: Researchers claim that this finding is evidence that supports the existing theory that the Moon initially separated from the earth as a lump of mass. They hypothesize that the moon's current surface is formed by the accumulation of multiple layers of space dust covering the previous surface.

Reasoning: Study of the soil from the craters on Moon showed the existence of crystalline graphite identical to the crystalline graphite on the floor of the Atlantic Ocean. Moreover, this crystalline graphite is not found on the rest of the surface of the Moon.

A. Whether soil samples from every crater on Moon have been studied.
B. Whether crystalline graphite has been found on Earth's Continental surface.
C. Whether the researchers have studied the core of the Moon along with its surface.
﻿﻿D. Whether the Moon could have been formed from a separate planetary mass other than the Earth.

A, B, C, D doesnt seem feasible options. Also, the question states  evaluating the researchers' claim regarding  the usage of the finding  as evidence. 
For the fifth option, nothing extra needs to be done, the existing data needs to be analyzed further. But for rest four either new experiments needs to be done or if already done, no info regarding the same is provided in the passage.

E. Whether the composition of other substances in the Moon crater soil samples is significantly different from that in the soil of the Atlantic Ocean floor. - The additional hypothesis state that moon's current surface is formed by accumulation of space dust covering the previous surface. So the studied soil must be containing materials both similar to and different from what is found on earth. Hence this seems to be the correct response.

This was my reasoning for selecting E, would love to see the original explanation.

Correct Option: E

EnglishAgast · Answer

Hello  Sakshi2013 , can you pls post the OE. Thank you!

shubhim20 · Answer

KarishmaB   MartyMurray  please help

egmat · Answer

Alright, let's tackle this question step by step. And honestly? This is one of those GMAT Critical Reasoning questions that makes me want to pull my (remaining) hair out - not because it's impossible, but because it's testing whether you can cut through all the scientific jargon to find what actually matters.

Step 1: What the heck are these researchers claiming?
 
Let me break this down without all the fancy science talk:
 The Facts: 
 
 Moon craters have graphite identical to stuff on the Atlantic Ocean floor 
 This graphite ISN'T found anywhere else on the Moon's surface 
 Researchers think this proves the Moon broke off from Earth originally 
 They say the Moon's current surface is just layers of space dust covering the original surface  
 Their Logic:  "Hey, if we find Earth-stuff in Moon craters (which expose the original surface under all that dust), that proves the Moon came from Earth!"

Step 2: What question should we be asking?
 
Here's where the GMAT gets sneaky. They want us to find what would help us evaluate whether this evidence actually supports their claim. In other words: "Is this graphite similarity actually good evidence, or is it kind of BS?"

Step 3: Let's eliminate the garbage answers

A. Whether every crater has been studied 
 Look, this is about sample size, but it doesn't touch the core issue. Even if they only studied a few craters, finding the pattern still supports their theory.
 B. Whether graphite exists on Earth's continents 
 Meh. They're specifically comparing to Atlantic Ocean floor graphite. This is a distraction.
 C. Whether they studied the Moon's core 
 Nope. We're evaluating surface evidence here. The core doesn't help us judge whether crater evidence is solid.
 D. Whether the Moon could have formed from another planet 
 This is actually not terrible - it's asking about alternative explanations. But it doesn't directly test the strength of the evidence itself.
Step 4: Why E is the winner
 E. Whether other substances in crater soil differ from Atlantic Ocean floor 
This is the money shot, and here's why:
If you're claiming that finding identical graphite proves common origin, then logically, you should find OTHER similar substances too, right?
 
 If crater soil has identical graphite BUT everything else is completely different from ocean floor soil → your evidence is pretty weak (maybe it's just coincidence) 
 If crater soil has identical graphite AND several other matching substances → now you've got some real evidence

The Bottom Line
 The researchers are hanging their entire argument on one similarity. Answer E directly tests whether that similarity is meaningful evidence or just a fluke. It's asking: "Is this actually strong evidence, or are you cherry-picking one match while ignoring everything else that doesn't match?"
And that, my friend, is exactly what the GMAT wants you to recognize - the difference between strong evidence and weak evidence masquerading as proof.
 Answer: E 
(Sorry for the novel-length explanation, but hey - better to understand it completely than to guess and pray, right?)

Study of the soil from the craters on Moon showed the existence of cry

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Study of the soil from the craters on Moon showed the existence of cry

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards