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

 It is currently 17 Jan 2019, 22:11

### 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 January
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
303112345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829303112
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### The winning strategy for a high GRE score

January 17, 2019

January 17, 2019

08:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Learn the winning strategy for a high GRE score — what do people who reach a high score do differently? We're going to share insights, tips and strategies from data we've collected from over 50,000 students who used examPAL.
• ### Free GMAT Strategy Webinar

January 19, 2019

January 19, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Aiming to score 760+? Attend this FREE session to learn how to Define your GMAT Strategy, Create your Study Plan and Master the Core Skills to excel on the GMAT.

# Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1021
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2010, 05:35
3
10
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

43% (02:26) correct 57% (02:18) wrong based on 486 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over the interpretation of certain footprints that were left among other footprints in hardened volcanic ash at site G. Dr. Tyson claims they are clearly early hominid footprints since they show human characteristics: a squarish heel and a big toe immediately adjacent to the next toe. However, since the footprints indicate that if hominids made those prints they would have had to walk in an unexpected cross-stepping manner, by placing the left foot to the right of the right foot. Dr. Rees rejects Dr. Tyson’s conclusion.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines Dr. Tyson’s conclusion?

(A) The foot prints showing human characteristics were clearly those of at least two distinct individuals.

(B) Certain species of bears had feet very like human feet, except that the outside toe on each foot was the biggest toe and the innermost toe was the smallest toe.

(C) Footprints shaped like a human’s that do not show a cross-stepping pattern exist at site M, which is a mile away from site G, and the two sets of footprints are contemporaneous.

(D) When the moist volcanic ash became sealed under additional layers of ash before hardening, some details of some of the footprints were erased.

(E) Most of the other footprints at site G were of animals with hooves.

Source: LSAT

_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 172
Location: Boston
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Oct 2010, 06:49
9
Going with A for the first one and B for the second one.

noboru wrote:
Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over the interpretation of certain footprints that were left among other footprints in hardened volcanic ash at site G. Dr. Tyson claims they are clearly early hominid footprints since they show human characteristics: a squarish heel and a big toe immediately adjacent to the next toe. However, since the footprints indicate that if hominids made those prints they would have had to walk in an unexpected cross-stepping manner, by placing the left foot to the right of the right foot. Dr. Rees rejects Dr. Tyson’s conclusion.

The disagreement between the two paleontologists is over which one of the following?

Dr. Tyson thinks that the evidence shows the footprints belong to early hominids due to the shape of the footprints, while Dr. Rees believes they can't belong to early hominids because of the walking pattern. Sounds like they're disagreeing over interpretations of different aspects of the evidence.

(A) the relative significance of various aspects of the evidence Bingo
(B) the assumption that early hominid footprints are distinguishable from other footprints Clearly they agree with that, or this disagreement wouldn't happen to begin with
(C) the possibility of using the evidence of footprints to determine the gait of the creature that made those footprints The gait has been determined and is the evidence that Dr. Rees is using, so this is not a point of dissention
(D) the assumption that evidence from one paleontologic site is enough to support a conclusion They're both drawing conclusions, neither one is arguing that no conclusion can be drawn
(E) the likelihood that early hominids would have walked upright on two feet Dr. Rees didn't say anything about this possibility

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines Dr. Tyson’s conclusion?

(A) The foot prints showing human characteristics were clearly those of at least two distinct individuals. This would strengthen Dr. Tyson's conclusion by weakening Dr. Rees's, because it would open the possibility of the strange pattern of footprints being caused by two people walking in a particular fashion, causing the overlap of footprints
(B) Certain species of bears had feet very like human feet, except that the outside toe on each foot was the biggest toe and the innermost toe was the smallest toe. This would explain the "cross-stepping pattern" - because the bear's feet look the same as a human's, except they're essentially reversed. So the footprint from the left foot would look like the right foot, and vice versa. This strengthen's Dr. Rees's position, by giving a reason to believe the footprints might belong to the bear, and thereby weakens Dr. Tyson's conclusion.
(C) Footprints shaped like a human’s that do not show a cross-stepping pattern exist at site M, which is a mile away from site G, and the two sets of footprints are contemporaneous. Strengthen's Dr. Tyson's argument by showing that the cross-stepping pattern might be an anomaly
(D) When the moist volcanic ash became sealed under additional layers of ash before hardening, some details of some of the footprints were erased. I originally answered this by POE until I started typing this post and realized that B is a much better answer. This doesn't really affect either argument, since both conclusions are being made from the same set of prints.
(E) Most of the other footprints at site G were of animals with hooves. Totally irrelevant.
##### General Discussion
Manager
Joined: 24 Jul 2009
Posts: 243
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2010, 06:12
1
noboru wrote:
Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over the interpretation of certain footprints that were left among other footprints in hardened volcanic ash at site G. Dr. Tyson claims they are clearly early hominid footprints since they show human characteristics: a squarish heel and a big toe immediately adjacent to the next toe. However, since the footprints indicate that if hominids made those prints they would have had to walk in an unexpected cross-stepping manner, by placing the left foot to the right of the right foot. Dr. Rees rejects Dr. Tyson’s conclusion.

The disagreement between the two paleontologists is over which one of the following?
(A) the relative significance of various aspects of the evidence
(B) the assumption that early hominid footprints are distinguishable from other footprints
(C) the possibility of using the evidence of footprints to determine the gait of the creature that made those footprints
(D) the assumption that evidence from one paleontologic site is enough to support a conclusion
(E) the likelihood that early hominids would have walked upright on two feet

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines Dr. Tyson’s conclusion?
(A) The foot prints showing human characteristics were clearly those of at least two distinct individuals.
(B) Certain species of bears had feet very like human feet, except that the outside toe on each foot was the biggest toe and the innermost toe was the smallest toe.
(C) Footprints shaped like a human’s that do not show a cross-stepping pattern exist at site M, which is a mile away from site G, and the two sets of footprints are contemporaneous.
(D) When the moist volcanic ash became sealed under additional layers of ash before hardening, some details of some of the footprints were erased.
(E) Most of the other footprints at site G were of animals with hooves.

I must say the question is tricky..!!

For first question, IMO, A and B are the only contenders.
Finally A.
Why not B: I don't think that any of the paleontologists is assuming that "early hominid footprints are distinguishable from other footprints"

For second question

Conclusion:"they are clearly early hominid footprints"

B weakens the conclusion..!!

OA plz.
Director
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 741
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2010, 06:34
IMO:
1. A
2. A

1. Dr. T is arguing on the structure of foot print while Dr. R arguing on the way of walking. Both are different approaches or different aspects of one evidence. Only A is focusing on both of these while B/C/D/E are either focusing on just one aspect or irrelevant info.

2. Dr. T is arguing on the structure of foot print, which leads to hominids. If it is shown that the structure is similar to more than one category then we can weaken Dr. T's argument. A does that.

noboru wrote:
Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over the interpretation of certain footprints that were left among other footprints in hardened volcanic ash at site G. Dr. Tyson claims they are clearly early hominid footprints since they show human characteristics: a squarish heel and a big toe immediately adjacent to the next toe. However, since the footprints indicate that if hominids made those prints they would have had to walk in an unexpected cross-stepping manner, by placing the left foot to the right of the right foot. Dr. Rees rejects Dr. Tyson’s conclusion.

The disagreement between the two paleontologists is over which one of the following?
(A) the relative significance of various aspects of the evidence
(B) the assumption that early hominid footprints are distinguishable from other footprints
(C) the possibility of using the evidence of footprints to determine the gait of the creature that made those footprints
(D) the assumption that evidence from one paleontologic site is enough to support a conclusion
(E) the likelihood that early hominids would have walked upright on two feet

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines Dr. Tyson’s conclusion?
(A) The foot prints showing human characteristics were clearly those of at least two distinct individuals.
(B) Certain species of bears had feet very like human feet, except that the outside toe on each foot was the biggest toe and the innermost toe was the smallest toe.
(C) Footprints shaped like a human’s that do not show a cross-stepping pattern exist at site M, which is a mile away from site G, and the two sets of footprints are contemporaneous.
(D) When the moist volcanic ash became sealed under additional layers of ash before hardening, some details of some of the footprints were erased.
(E) Most of the other footprints at site G were of animals with hooves.

_________________

Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

VP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1021
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 May 2010, 14:01
For the first one OA is A, for the second one, lets discuss a bit more.
_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 176
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2010, 06:45
Is it A for the first one? I went for B.

B, because two big toes could still be adjacent to each other if they belonged to two bears standing next to each other.
Manager
Joined: 11 Mar 2010
Posts: 57
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 May 2010, 10:31
I went for 'A' for first one. why 'A' is not correct?? wats justification for 'B'?

On 2nd I choose 'A'. I rejected 'B' coz it states some bear's foot are similar to humans but doesnt say they were actually seen near volcanic footprints.
Director
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 741
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 May 2010, 00:39
For (2), B says:
(B) Certain species of bears had feet very like human feet, except that the outside toe on each foot was the biggest toe and the innermost toe was the smallest toe.

So, there are some difference b/w hominids' and bears' footprints and these can differentiate easily. So, I think B strengthens DR. T case rather than weakens.

Noboru, can we have the OA?
_________________

Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

VP
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1084
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2010, 10:56
I went for B and B.

After reading thru the explanation realized it should A for the first one.

but I still think it should be B for the second one.

What is the OA?
Manager
Joined: 14 Feb 2010
Posts: 65
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 May 2010, 21:50
For the second one, my take is B. What is OA please?
Intern
Joined: 28 Sep 2010
Posts: 2
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Oct 2010, 05:38
I think for the second one the OA is A and not B because,
If the toe for the bear is on the outside then the two toes would not be adjacent to one another.
On the other hand if the prints belonged to two different individuals then the premise used by dr tyson could be negated. What do you'll think?

and i think its high time someone posted the OA
Intern
Joined: 28 Sep 2010
Posts: 2
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Oct 2010, 08:15
1
TehJay wrote:
Going with A for the first one and B for the second one.

noboru wrote:
Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over the interpretation of certain footprints that were left among other footprints in hardened volcanic ash at site G. Dr. Tyson claims they are clearly early hominid footprints since they show human characteristics: a squarish heel and a big toe immediately adjacent to the next toe. However, since the footprints indicate that if hominids made those prints they would have had to walk in an unexpected cross-stepping manner, by placing the left foot to the right of the right foot. Dr. Rees rejects Dr. Tyson’s conclusion.

The disagreement between the two paleontologists is over which one of the following?

Dr. Tyson thinks that the evidence shows the footprints belong to early hominids due to the shape of the footprints, while Dr. Rees believes they can't belong to early hominids because of the walking pattern. Sounds like they're disagreeing over interpretations of different aspects of the evidence.

(A) the relative significance of various aspects of the evidence Bingo
(B) the assumption that early hominid footprints are distinguishable from other footprints Clearly they agree with that, or this disagreement wouldn't happen to begin with
(C) the possibility of using the evidence of footprints to determine the gait of the creature that made those footprints The gait has been determined and is the evidence that Dr. Rees is using, so this is not a point of dissention
(D) the assumption that evidence from one paleontologic site is enough to support a conclusion They're both drawing conclusions, neither one is arguing that no conclusion can be drawn
(E) the likelihood that early hominids would have walked upright on two feet Dr. Rees didn't say anything about this possibility

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines Dr. Tyson’s conclusion?

(A) The foot prints showing human characteristics were clearly those of at least two distinct individuals. This would strengthen Dr. Tyson's conclusion by weakening Dr. Rees's, because it would open the possibility of the strange pattern of footprints being caused by two people walking in a particular fashion, causing the overlap of footprints
(B) Certain species of bears had feet very like human feet, except that the outside toe on each foot was the biggest toe and the innermost toe was the smallest toe. This would explain the "cross-stepping pattern" - because the bear's feet look the same as a human's, except they're essentially reversed. So the footprint from the left foot would look like the right foot, and vice versa. This strengthen's Dr. Rees's position, by giving a reason to believe the footprints might belong to the bear, and thereby weakens Dr. Tyson's conclusion.
(C) Footprints shaped like a human’s that do not show a cross-stepping pattern exist at site M, which is a mile away from site G, and the two sets of footprints are contemporaneous. Strengthen's Dr. Tyson's argument by showing that the cross-stepping pattern might be an anomaly
(D) When the moist volcanic ash became sealed under additional layers of ash before hardening, some details of some of the footprints were erased. I originally answered this by POE until I started typing this post and realized that B is a much better answer. This doesn't really affect either argument, since both conclusions are being made from the same set of prints.
(E) Most of the other footprints at site G were of animals with hooves. Totally irrelevant.

Thank you for putting me out of my misery. It is an excellent explanation :D
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Affiliations: Veritas Prep
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Posts: 12
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Oct 2010, 08:53
1
This explanation is very clear and thorough! I would just add one thing for those trying to decide between answers A) and B) on the second question. It's important to keep track of what conclusion the scientists are arguing over: whether or not the tracks are evidence of humans. Answer A) in the second question does not call that conclusion into question. It just says that there might be some disagreement about HOW MANY humans there are, without questioning the conclusion that humans were present.
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 369
WE 1: 4 years Tech
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jan 2011, 05:59
I still dont get how the answer to the question can be A . Can someone explain. I understand that Tyson is trying to find to whom do the footprintsin quest belong and Rees is not trying to find anything.He just rejects Tysons claims because he thinks a hominid couldnt have made those proints.
_________________

My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 438
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Apr 2011, 10:14
1.A 2.B

i think this was a bit challenging but managed to handle it right
Manager
Status: ==GMAT Ninja==
Joined: 08 Jan 2011
Posts: 194
Schools: ISB, IIMA ,SP Jain , XLRI
WE 1: Aditya Birla Group (sales)
WE 2: Saint Gobain Group (sales)
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jul 2011, 09:06
1
TehJay wrote:
Going with A for the first one and B for the second one.

noboru wrote:
Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over the interpretation of certain footprints that were left among other footprints in hardened volcanic ash at site G. Dr. Tyson claims they are clearly early hominid footprints since they show human characteristics: a squarish heel and a big toe immediately adjacent to the next toe. However, since the footprints indicate that if hominids made those prints they would have had to walk in an unexpected cross-stepping manner, by placing the left foot to the right of the right foot. Dr. Rees rejects Dr. Tyson’s conclusion.

The disagreement between the two paleontologists is over which one of the following?

Dr. Tyson thinks that the evidence shows the footprints belong to early hominids due to the shape of the footprints, while Dr. Rees believes they can't belong to early hominids because of the walking pattern. Sounds like they're disagreeing over interpretations of different aspects of the evidence.

(A) the relative significance of various aspects of the evidence Bingo
(B) the assumption that early hominid footprints are distinguishable from other footprints Clearly they agree with that, or this disagreement wouldn't happen to begin with
(C) the possibility of using the evidence of footprints to determine the gait of the creature that made those footprints The gait has been determined and is the evidence that Dr. Rees is using, so this is not a point of dissention
(D) the assumption that evidence from one paleontologic site is enough to support a conclusion They're both drawing conclusions, neither one is arguing that no conclusion can be drawn
(E) the likelihood that early hominids would have walked upright on two feet Dr. Rees didn't say anything about this possibility

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines Dr. Tyson’s conclusion?

(A) The foot prints showing human characteristics were clearly those of at least two distinct individuals. This would strengthen Dr. Tyson's conclusion by weakening Dr. Rees's, because it would open the possibility of the strange pattern of footprints being caused by two people walking in a particular fashion, causing the overlap of footprints
(B) Certain species of bears had feet very like human feet, except that the outside toe on each foot was the biggest toe and the innermost toe was the smallest toe. This would explain the "cross-stepping pattern" - because the bear's feet look the same as a human's, except they're essentially reversed. So the footprint from the left foot would look like the right foot, and vice versa. This strengthen's Dr. Rees's position, by giving a reason to believe the footprints might belong to the bear, and thereby weakens Dr. Tyson's conclusion.
(C) Footprints shaped like a human’s that do not show a cross-stepping pattern exist at site M, which is a mile away from site G, and the two sets of footprints are contemporaneous. Strengthen's Dr. Tyson's argument by showing that the cross-stepping pattern might be an anomaly
(D) When the moist volcanic ash became sealed under additional layers of ash before hardening, some details of some of the footprints were erased. I originally answered this by POE until I started typing this post and realized that B is a much better answer. This doesn't really affect either argument, since both conclusions are being made from the same set of prints.
(E) Most of the other footprints at site G were of animals with hooves. Totally irrelevant.

Lovely Explanation ...
_________________

WarLocK
_____________________________________________________________________________
The War is oNNNNNNNNNNNNN for 720+
see my Test exp here http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-test-experience-111610.html
do not hesitate me giving kudos if you like my post.

Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 184
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jan 2012, 08:49
mundasingh123 wrote:
I still dont get how the answer to the question can be A . Can someone explain. I understand that Tyson is trying to find to whom do the footprintsin quest belong and Rees is not trying to find anything.He just rejects Tysons claims because he thinks a hominid couldnt have made those proints.

One Dr., by going with the size of the foot print, interprets the data in one way and the other going by the arrangement interprets the data in another way (though the second interpretation contradicts the first one, its a different story)

So, the data is significant.
_________________

-------------------------
-Aravind Chembeti

Manager
Status: How easy it is?
Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Posts: 89
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
GMAT 1: 650 Q50 V27
GMAT 2: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Operations (Other)
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Sep 2014, 13:52
Moderators, can you please edit the question as two different questions and provide the OA?
Current Student
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4361
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2015, 19:57
Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over the interpretation of certain footprints that were left among other footprints in hardened volcanic ash at site G. Dr. Tyson claims they are clearly early hominid footprints since they show human characteristics: a squarish heel and a big toe immediately adjacent to the next toe. However, since the footprints indicate that if hominids made those prints they would have had to walk in an unexpected cross-stepping manner, by placing the left foot to the right of the right foot. Dr. Rees rejects Dr. Tyson's conclusion.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines Dr. Tyson's conclusion?

(A) The footprints showing human characteristics were clearly those of at least two distinct individuals.

(B) Certain species of bears had feet very like human feet, except that the outside toe on each foot was the biggest toe and the innermost toe was the smallest toe.

(C) Footprints shaped like a human's that do not show a cross-stepping pattern exist at site M, which is a mile away from site G, and the two sets of footprints are contemporaneous.

(D) When the moist volcanic ash became sealed under additional layers of ash before hardening, some details of some of the footprints were erased.

(E) Most of the other footprints at site G were of animals with hooves.
_________________
Manager
Joined: 05 Mar 2013
Posts: 56
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.56
WE: Marketing (Telecommunications)
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2015, 21:49
2
why dont u just post the OA at the same time , my life would be far more better that ways
Re: Two paleontologists, Dr Tyson and Dr. Rees, disagree over &nbs [#permalink] 07 Apr 2015, 21:49

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 23 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by