Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 04:16

It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 04:16

Toolkit

Practice Tests

Verbal Archive [Locked]

CR Archive

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Apr 23
Free full-length test!
08:00 PM PDT
-
09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 23
A Non-Native’s Journey to GMAT 695 with V88 (99th percentile)
01:30 AM EDT
-
02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 25
From ‘GMAT Is Not for Me’ to a 695— Beating Her Target by 50 Points
12:30 AM EDT
-
01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 26
Score High on the GMAT with Target Test Prep
10:00 AM EDT
-
11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 27
Try OnDemand GMAT Masterclass
11:00 AM EDT
-
12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 28
Join - GMAT Day!
08:00 AM PDT
-
11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.

Back to Forum

Create Topic

12 Days of Christmas GMAT Competition 2025 - Day 1: Materials

1 2 3 4

arnab24

Joined: 16 Jan 2024

Last visit: 25 Feb 2026

Posts: 96

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 7

Location: India

Schools: ISB '26

GPA: 8.80

Products:

Schools: ISB '26

Posts: 96

Kudos: 81

[1]

15 Dec 2025, 23:05

Kudos

Bookmarks

The main conclusion of the argument is chemical crystallization either from saline groundwater or surface deposits, was likely involved in the formation of the bands. We need to weaken the argument. So we need to attack premise or assumption by Materials scientist. Key assumption taken here is that there are only two hypothesis that can play the role. Now let's check options one by one :

A. Field measurements show that wind abrasion is currently occurring at many ripple-band sites on the Atria Plateau. - Incorrect , as it's not weakening it. It just tells at the current moment wind abrasion is happening.

B. The two hypotheses do not exhaust the possibilities regarding formation processes for ripple bands. - Correct , it directly attacks scientist's assumption.

Options C,D,E are all irrelevant and not attacking any of scientist's reasoning. So option B is the correct answer.

Bunuel

Materials scientist: “Ripple bands” are patterned surface formations consisting of a raised ring of coarse grains surrounding a center of finer grains. They are found mainly on high-altitude desert flats. In attempts to explain how they were formed, two hypotheses are currently most commonly debated: one proposes wind abrasion, the other proposes chemical crystallization. But wind abrasion cannot be the complete explanation for the uniformity in width of the ripple bands on the Atira Plateau, located in a region with highly variable wind patterns. Therefore, chemical crystallization, either from saline groundwater or surface deposits, was likely involved in the formation of the bands.

Which of the following would, if true, most weaken the scientist’s argument?

A. Field measurements show that wind abrasion is currently occurring at many ripple-band sites on the Atira Plateau.
B. The two hypotheses do not exhaust the possibilities regarding formation processes for ripple bands.
C. The definition given for ripple bands excludes many surface features that may be caused by wind abrasion or chemical crystallization.
D. The ripple bands on the Atira Plateau were probably not all formed at the same time.
E. Neither of the two hypotheses explains how coarse and fine grains came to be on the Atira Plateau in the first place.

Maddie123

Joined: 01 May 2023

Last visit: 08 Mar 2026

Posts: 15

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 5

Location: India

Concentration: Strategy, General Management

Schools: ISB '26 (S)

GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q84 V85 DI81 Verified score

GPA: 8.99

Products:

Schools: ISB '26 (S)

GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q84 V85 DI81 Verified score

Posts: 15

Kudos: 5

[1]

15 Dec 2025, 23:47

Kudos

Bookmarks

I believe the answer is B because there can be other explanations for the cause of ripple bands

Sujithz001

Joined: 09 Jun 2024

Last visit: 06 Feb 2026

Posts: 101

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 75

Posts: 101

Kudos: 46

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 00:15

Kudos

Bookmarks

Weaken the arguement

Conclusion: Chemical crystallization, either from saline groundwater or surface deposits was likely involved in the formation of the bands.

Premise: Wind abrasion is not possible due to high variation in the patterns of wind.

Assumption (holding link): Since wind abrasion was not causing it, only chemical crystallization could have.

Answer: B. Reason: There can be another third cause that could have caused this Ripple bands.

Not the answers & reasons:

D is not the answer because time of formation was never talked in the passage. So we can make no inference based on it.

sriharsha4444

Joined: 06 Jun 2018

Last visit: 05 Mar 2026

Posts: 125

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 803

Posts: 125

Kudos: 84

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 00:34

Kudos

Bookmarks

Two most popular hypothesis are mentioned for a phenomenon - wind abrasion and crystallization.
When one didn't explain the case, the author simply jumped to the 2nd one as being part of the explanation.

Gap: it could be that some other hypothesis is correct.

A. wind abrasion happening now at the site doesnt have an effect on the conclusion as the statement doesnt tell its effect.
B. Correct. Neither tell completely the possibilities regarding the formation. So there can be another hypothesis that is correct and not necessarily one of the two
C. Strengthener. It says there many things not mentioned that can be explained by either hypothesis.
D. Not formed at the same time but how are they uniform ? So still authors argument that it can't be wind and it is also crystallization stands there.
E. Origin of the grains is not needed to boost or weaken the argument.

Archit3110

Major Poster

Joined: 18 Aug 2017

Last visit: 23 Apr 2026

Posts: 8,628

Own Kudos:

5,190

[1]

Given Kudos: 243

Status:You learn more from failure than from success.

Location: India

Concentration: Sustainability, Marketing

GMAT Focus 1: 545 Q79 V79 DI73 Verified score

GMAT Focus 2: 645 Q83 V82 DI81 Verified score

GPA: 4

WE:Marketing (Energy)

Products:

GMAT Focus 2: 645 Q83 V82 DI81 Verified score

Posts: 8,628

Kudos: 5,190

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 00:35

Kudos

Bookmarks

Materials scientist: “Ripple bands” are patterned surface formations consisting of a raised ring of coarse grains surrounding a center of finer grains. They are found mainly on high-altitude desert flats. In attempts to explain how they were formed, two hypotheses are currently most commonly debated: one proposes wind abrasion, the other proposes chemical crystallization. But wind abrasion cannot be the complete explanation for the uniformity in width of the ripple bands on the Atira Plateau, located in a region with highly variable wind patterns. Therefore, chemical crystallization, either from saline groundwater or surface deposits, was likely involved in the formation of the bands.

Which of the following would, if true, most weaken the scientist’s argument?

Conclusion : CC saline GW or SD was involved with wind .... for Ripple bands formation ..

A. Field measurements show that wind abrasion is currently occurring at many ripple-band sites on the Atira Plateau. does not strongly weaken the conclusion
B. The two hypotheses do not exhaust the possibilities regarding formation processes for ripple bands. ; there could be another reason , weakens the conclusion
C. The definition given for ripple bands excludes many surface features that may be caused by wind abrasion or chemical crystallization. not with argument
D. The ripple bands on the Atira Plateau were probably not all formed at the same time does not weaken the conclusion.
E. Neither of the two hypotheses explains how coarse and fine grains came to be on the Atira Plateau in the first place. does not hold valid and strong to weaken the conclusion

OPTION B is correct

msignatius

Joined: 28 Aug 2025

Last visit: 09 Apr 2026

Posts: 131

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 31

Location: India

Concentration: Strategy, Marketing

Schools: ISB '27 NUS '26 INSEAD Jan '26 (S) IESE '26 (D) HEC (S) IMD ESADE'26 Judge '26 LBS '27

GMAT Focus 1: 705 Q86 V85 DI84 Verified score

GPA: 3.5

WE:Marketing (Consulting)

Products:

Schools: ISB '27 NUS '26 INSEAD Jan '26 (S) IESE '26 (D) HEC (S) IMD ESADE'26 Judge '26 LBS '27

GMAT Focus 1: 705 Q86 V85 DI84 Verified score

Posts: 131

Kudos: 98

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 00:44

Kudos

Bookmarks

I remember during my practice - though I don't remember exactly where - I solved a similar question, except the alternative explanations were 'wind abrasion' and 'heat' instead of 'crystallization'. Of course, I didn't want to be biased by that older question, so I gave the question a fresh look. Pre-thinking here would be: We're assuming that just because one theory isn't viable, the other one must be two. But these are just the two that, according to the stem, are 'most commonly debated'. There may be lesser-debated theories that are far more viable. Why would be discard those. Anyway, here go my reasonings:

A: The presence of wind abrasion doesn't imply they are the ones causing the "ripple bands", despite their occurrence. So, eliminate.

B: Bingo. What I said above: what if one of the lesser-debated theories explains the phenomenon. IMO, the answer.

C: This contradicts both theories, including the one that the argument supports. But then again, it wouldn't weaken the argument as much as B, because 'surface features' not matching either process doesn't eliminate their existence. Like stated in the stem - crystallization may be from saline groundwater, so the formation could take place below the surface.

D: Irrelevant. The timeline of when the bands were formed doesn't clue us in to anything.

E: The hypotheses are more concerned with explaining the formation of the geological features, not how an element characterizing said feature, "coarse and fine grains" came to be. Hence, eliminated.

Bunuel

crimson_king

Joined: 21 Dec 2023

Last visit: 23 Apr 2026

Posts: 152

Own Kudos:

156

[1]

Given Kudos: 113

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

Posts: 152

Kudos: 156

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 00:55

Kudos

Bookmarks

Analyzing the options one by one,

(A) - Even if wind abrasion is occurring it does not necessarily negate the argument because it mentions that wind abrasion may not be a complete explanation but it may serve as a partial explanation along with chemical crystallization. Eliminate
(B) This indicates that these two causes may not be the exhaustive list of causes that may explain the ripple band phenomenon & weakens the idea that chemical crystallization was involved. Maybe there was another possibility. Keep
(C) Even if the definition excludes many features it may include some features that could be explained by either one of these mechanism. Does not necessarily weaken the argument. Eliminate
(D) Totally irrelevant & out of scope. We dont care about the time of formation of the ripple bands. Eliminate
(E) We are concerned with how the ripple bands got formed & not about how the components came to be in the first place. Out of scope. Eliminate

Answer is Option (B)

Tejasethb

Joined: 07 Oct 2020

Last visit: 13 Apr 2026

Posts: 21

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 34

Posts: 21

Kudos: 6

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 01:39

Kudos

Bookmarks

Author is providing H1 and H2, what if there is H3 which author have not takjen in accountl; what author is concluding since there is no H1 therefore there is H2. But what if there is H3 which is causing the formation.

adityaprateek15

Joined: 26 May 2023

Last visit: 23 Apr 2026

Posts: 346

Own Kudos:

170

[1]

Given Kudos: 323

Location: India

Schools: Ross '26 Tepper '26 McCombs '26

GPA: 2.7

Products:

Schools: Ross '26 Tepper '26 McCombs '26

Posts: 346

Kudos: 170

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 02:29

Kudos

Bookmarks

This is how the argument is structured:

Two possibilities: W and C
Author says W cannot be the complete explanation, so, it must be C.

The argument takes a leap by saying since W is not a possibility, it must be C. What if there exists a 3rd possible explanation?

A. Argument says that W cannot be the complete explanation. The fact that W is happening at many sites doesn't condradict this. Eliminate.

B. This is what the author failed to consider. It directly attacks the conclusion. Keep.

C. This is irrelevant. We want to know whether C is the explanation for the formation of bands. What the definition excludes is irrelevant. Eliminate.

D. This seems to be providing an alternative explanation, but it doesn't weaken the conclusion. Maybe C was the process involved at all different times.

E. This is completely irrelevant. Eliminate.

Option B.

Bunuel

prepapr

Joined: 06 Jan 2025

Last visit: 22 Apr 2026

Posts: 92

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 5

GMAT Focus 1: 615 Q85 V80 DI77 Verified score

Posts: 92

Kudos: 82

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 02:35

Kudos

Bookmarks

Premises- there are currently two hypothesis on formation of ripple bands- wind abrasion and chemical crystallisation. For the plateau under consideration Atira, wind abrasion cannot fully explain the bands as the region experiences highly variable wind patterns.
Conclusion: Therefore crystallisation is the reason behind formation of ripple bands at Atira

Evaluating answer choices:
A) The argument has raised a concern that the uniform width of these bands cannot be caused by the variable winds at Atira. Even though wind abrasion is observed at sites in Atira, this cannot explain the uniform bands. Hence this is not in line with reasoning of argument
B) The argument has negated one(wind abrasion) hypothesis and jumped to the conclusion that the other(crystallisation) is the explanation, while there may be another explanation altogether. Hence this answer choice weakens the conclusion
C)The conclusion is not concerned about the definition of ripple bands
D)It does not matter when the bands were formed. All that matters is why
E)This does not concern the argument

Hence B is the answer

Bunuel

sanjitscorps18

Joined: 26 Jan 2019

Last visit: 03 Mar 2026

Posts: 723

Own Kudos:

740

[1]

Given Kudos: 130

Location: India

Schools: IMD'26

Products:

Schools: IMD'26

Posts: 723

Kudos: 740

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 03:24

Kudos

Bookmarks

Bunuel

Ripple bands have only two explanations - either winds or crystallization
Conclusion -> Cause is crystallization and not wind

A -> Other sites are not relevant to the discussion
B -> Weakener. There could be other reasons too but the author limits it to these two.
C -> We'll stick to the definition provided
D -> This does not explain the uniformity of the bands
E -> Extension of the passage. Irrelevant.

Option B

asperioresfacere

Joined: 03 Nov 2025

Last visit: 21 Apr 2026

Posts: 61

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 106

Posts: 61

Kudos: 53

16 Dec 2025, 03:35

Kudos

Bookmarks

Ripple bands on Atira Plateau , Two hypothesis - Wind Abrasion , Chemical Crystallization
Observation : Ripple bands on Atira plateau have uniform width but highly variable wind patterns.

Conclusion : Wind abrasion can't explain uniformity of width.

Option A : The argument is about how the winds were formed , Not what is happening now . Does not attack the logic
Option B : The conclusion says chemical crystallization was likely involved . It does not claim it was the only explanation.
Option C : Irrelevant - This is about Definition not formation logic
Option D : This Directly attacks : Scientist assumes - Variable Wind - Different widths.
But if Bands formed at different times - each band formed under stable wind conditions ✅
Option E : Argument was about How winds were formed not where grains came from.

DhanyaAbhirami

Joined: 09 Mar 2024

Last visit: 16 Mar 2026

Posts: 55

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 14

Posts: 55

Kudos: 43

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 03:57

Kudos

Bookmarks

2 Approaches are debated, there may be other Approaches
Author didn't mention the exhaustive list of possibilities, hence can't eliminate and decide

rutikaoqw

Joined: 29 Oct 2025

Last visit: 20 Mar 2026

Posts: 30

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 5

Location: India

Schools: ISB '27 IIM

GMAT Focus 1: 605 Q84 V82 DI72 Verified score

GPA: 9.28

Schools: ISB '27 IIM

GMAT Focus 1: 605 Q84 V82 DI72 Verified score

Posts: 30

Kudos: 16

16 Dec 2025, 04:52

Kudos

Bookmarks

Correct answer:
D
I used method of elimination
A: Does not matter what current activity is
B: Does not matter if there are other causes, chemical crystallization still exists
C: OOS (premise is not to be challenged but taken as true)
E: Completely OOS

Reon

Joined: 16 Sep 2025

Last visit: 28 Mar 2026

Posts: 134

Own Kudos:

121

[1]

Given Kudos: 4

Posts: 134

Kudos: 121

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 05:38

Kudos

Bookmarks

Materials scientist: “Ripple bands” are patterned surface formations consisting of a raised ring of coarse grains surrounding a center of finer grains. They are found mainly on high-altitude desert flats. In attempts to explain how they were formed, two hypotheses are currently most commonly debated: one proposes wind abrasion, the other proposes chemical crystallization. But wind abrasion cannot be the complete explanation for the uniformity in width of the ripple bands on the Atira Plateau, located in a region with highly variable wind patterns. Therefore, chemical crystallization, either from saline groundwater or surface deposits, was likely involved in the formation of the bands.

Which of the following would, if true, most weaken the scientist’s argument?

A. Field measurements show that wind abrasion is currently occurring at many ripple-band sites on the Atira Plateau.
(Does not talk about the main issue of 2 processes whether or not they are responsible) Wrong
B. The two hypotheses do not exhaust the possibilities regarding formation processes for ripple bands.
(If there is a third possibility for the formation of bands then first & second are not likely involved in the process but the question only discussed about the two possibilities) Maybe ?
C. The definition given for ripple bands excludes many surface features that may be caused by wind abrasion or chemical crystallization. Irrelevant
D. The ripple bands on the Atira Plateau were probably not all formed at the same time.
(Even if they were not formed on the same time, we still don't know they formed because of crystallization on different times or because of wind abrasion) Wrong
E. Neither of the two hypotheses explains how coarse and fine grains came to be on the Atira Plateau in the first place. Wrong

B

lkj123

Joined: 17 Jul 2025

Last visit: 21 Apr 2026

Posts: 33

Own Kudos:

Posts: 33

Kudos: 19

16 Dec 2025, 06:12

Kudos

Bookmarks

by eliminating the choices, i get to option C

nousernamefine

Joined: 14 Jan 2024

Last visit: 11 Apr 2026

Posts: 38

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 131

Location: India

Schools: Columbia '27 Wharton '27 Stanford '27

GPA: 4

Schools: Columbia '27 Wharton '27 Stanford '27

Posts: 38

Kudos: 32

16 Dec 2025, 06:23

Kudos

Bookmarks

Here Scientist assumes that if A is not the answer to a problem, B would be. Assumption that just because A or B are debated answer.
Problem- Just because 2 answers debated, it doesn't mean only these 2 are possible justifications.
Weaken this- Prove something else is the problem. This is Option B and E.
Option B is problem in assumption but Option E actually weakens conclusion by saying that for coarse grain neither A nor B explains that. something else is causing the problem.

E is answer

Bunuel

Gift

12 Days of Christmas Competition

This question is part of our holiday event

Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more

hritik04

Joined: 11 Nov 2025

Last visit: 23 Apr 2026

Posts: 14

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 25

Posts: 14

Kudos: 9

16 Dec 2025, 07:10

Kudos

Bookmarks

Bunuel

Gift

12 Days of Christmas Competition

This question is part of our holiday event

Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more

Here to weakenening the statement, we just need to prove that ripple bands could be possibly made with wind abrasion.

If we look option D is says that all the ripple bands are not formated at the same time, that means there's no need of having uniform wind abrasion, hence Option D is correct one.

redandme21

Joined: 14 Dec 2025

Last visit: 05 Jan 2026

Posts: 97

Own Kudos:

[1]

Posts: 97

Kudos: 87

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 07:32

Kudos

Bookmarks

To most weaken this reasoning, we should challenge the move from "wind abrasion is inadequate" to "chemical crystallization was likely involved."

A Showing that wind abrasion is currently occurring does not address whether it can explain the uniform width of the bands, which is the core objection to wind abrasion in the argument.

B If the two hypotheses do not exhaust all possible explanations, then eliminating wind abrasion does not justify concluding that chemical crystallization was involved.

C The definition of ripple bands is not relevant.

D Whether the bands were formed at the same time is not relevant.

E How the grains arrived on the plateau is tangential to how the ripple bands themselves were formed.

IMO B

geocircle

Joined: 14 Dec 2025

Last visit: 27 Dec 2025

Posts: 90

Own Kudos:

[1]

Posts: 90

Kudos: 87

[1]

16 Dec 2025, 07:51

Kudos

Bookmarks

A Wind abrasion occurring now at many sites: it doesn't address uniformity issue, so doesn't weaken much.

B Two hypotheses don't exhaust possibilities: if there are other possible explanations, then eliminating wind abrasion doesn't necessarily mean chemical crystallization was involved. This attacks the reasoning.

C Definition excludes other features. It's irrelevant to formation cause of existing ripple bands.

D Not all formed at same time. It could weaken uniformity argument, maybe uniformity not due to same cause at all times, but not directly attacking main leap.

E It's irrelevant to which process shaped them into bands.

Answer B