| GMAT Club Forum https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/ |
|
| Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, https://gmatclub.com/forum/years-before-the-advent-of-plate-tectonics-the-widely-accepted-theory-100279-20.html |
Page 2 of 2 |
| Author: | PyjamaScientist [ 02 Jul 2021, 10:59 ] |
| Post subject: | Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, |
bm2201 Can some expert please explain why option C here is the incorrect answer choice? I do not deny that option E is correct. But, I do not see solid grounds on which I can reject option C. Because my second paragraph does speak on that front. Quote: Q3: The author of the passage suggests that the most likely explanation for the geological community’s response to continental drift theory in its day was that the theory
(A) was in conflict with certain aspects of plate tectonics theory (B) failed to account for how mountains were formed (C) did not adequately explain how continents moved through the ocean floor (D) was contradicted by the geophysical data of the time (E) was based on a kind of evidence that was considered insufficiently convincing |
|
| Author: | GMATNinja [ 20 Jul 2021, 06:45 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, |
PyjamaScientist wrote: bm2201 Can some expert please explain why option C here is the incorrect answer choice? I do not deny that option E is correct. But, I do not see solid grounds on which I can reject option C. Because my second paragraph does speak on that front. Quote: Q3: The author of the passage suggests that the most likely explanation for the geological community’s response to continental drift theory in its day was that the theory (A) was in conflict with certain aspects of plate tectonics theory (B) failed to account for how mountains were formed (C) did not adequately explain how continents moved through the ocean floor (D) was contradicted by the geophysical data of the time (E) was based on a kind of evidence that was considered insufficiently convincing In question 3, the problem with (C) is that the question asks what the author suggests is the MOST LIKELY explanation for the geological community’s response to continental drift. The movement of continents through the ocean floors is mentioned earlier in the second paragraph as a potential reason. But the author goes on to say “the MOST LIKELY cause for the rejection of continental drift… is the nature of the evidence that was put forward to support it.” For that reason, while (C) is a potential cause, it is not, according to the author, the MOST LIKELY cause, and we can eliminate it. I hope that helps! |
|
| Author: | tkorzhan1995 [ 22 Nov 2021, 15:01 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, |
GMATNinja, could you please help me to understand where I am getting wrong with my analysis? For the following question, I originally selected E. The first par provides examples of essential presumptions mentioned by Wegener in his book The Origin of Continents and Oceans. It is stated how valuable this book to geologists today. However, W's theory has been rejected by geologists in the past. Second par explains why W's theory was rejected by geologists in the past. One of the explanations is by Anthony Hallam. Per Anthony, many scientific phenomena have been accepted before they could be fully rejected. As a result of tying info from the first and second par, I determined that essential presumptions are examples of phenomena that have been accepted before they could be fully explained. What is an issue with this analysis? what should I take into account to avoid similar mistake in other questions? The author of the passage discusses the “essential presumptions” (see highlighted text) of The Origin of Continents and Oceans most likely in order to A) indicate features of Wegener’s theory that caused it to be doubted in its day B)show why Wegener’s theory is now regarded as prescient C) indicate differences between plate tectonics and the theory of continental drift D) cite features of the theory of continental drift for which no evidence was available in Wegener’s day E)point out aspects of Wegener’s theory that were accepted well before the advent of plate tectonics |
|
| Author: | GMATNinja [ 26 Nov 2021, 09:50 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, |
Question 5 tkorzhan1995 wrote: GMATNinja, could you please help me to understand where I am getting wrong with my analysis? For the following question, I originally selected E. The first par provides examples of essential presumptions mentioned by Wegener in his book The Origin of Continents and Oceans. It is stated how valuable this book to geologists today. However, W's theory has been rejected by geologists in the past. Second par explains why W's theory was rejected by geologists in the past. One of the explanations is by Anthony Hallam. Per Anthony, many scientific phenomena have been accepted before they could be fully rejected. As a result of tying info from the first and second par, I determined that essential presumptions are examples of phenomena that have been accepted before they could be fully explained. What is an issue with this analysis? what should I take into account to avoid similar mistake in other questions? The author of the passage discusses the “essential presumptions” (see highlighted text) of The Origin of Continents and Oceans most likely in order to A) indicate features of Wegener’s theory that caused it to be doubted in its day B)show why Wegener’s theory is now regarded as prescient C) indicate differences between plate tectonics and the theory of continental drift D) cite features of the theory of continental drift for which no evidence was available in Wegener’s day E)point out aspects of Wegener’s theory that were accepted well before the advent of plate tectonics When it comes to detail questions you have to look back at the exact context of the detail in question. The detail mentioned in question 5 really has nothing to do with the discussion of Anthony Hallam -- more on that at the end of this post, but first look at the discussion of "essential presumptions" in the first paragraph:
Here, you can see that the author is discussing how geologists today view Wegener's work -- they're pretty impressed with the "essential presumptions" that he made. Next, we learn how geologists of his time viewed his theory: "in its day Wegener's theory was rejected by the vast majority of geologists." It's only much later that Wegener is vindicated, when further evidence is offered for the plate tectonic theory. With that in mind, look at (E): Quote: (E) [The author of the passage discusses the “essential presumptions” of The Origin of Continents and Oceans most in order to] point out aspects of Wegener's theory that were accepted well before the advent of platetectonics As discussed above, these aspects weren't accepted until much later. So, the author doesn't include them in order to say that they were accepted well BEFORE plate tectonics. (E) is out. Here's (B): Quote: (B) show why Wegener's theory is now regarded as prescient This makes sense! Geologists today are impressed by Wegener's work because his presumptions turned out to be pretty spot-on. (B) is the correct answer to question 5. A bit more on how Hallam fits into the picture: as you mentioned, in the second paragraph the author discusses why geologists in the past rejected Wegener's theory. One reason could be that it lacked an "adequate mechanical basis." Hallam dismisses this explanation, saying that other things have been accepted before they were understood. However, there's no indication that Wegener's theory was accepted before it was understood -- in fact, the author says that it was NOT accepted in his day! So, the "essential presumptions" are definitely not examples of things that were accepted before they were understood. I hope that helps! |
|
| Author: | Praka [ 29 Nov 2021, 10:40 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, |
Was practicing RC's but cant find the rc timer anymore nor option for selection of ans |
|
| Author: | Sajjad1994 [ 29 Nov 2021, 10:47 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, |
Praka wrote: Was practicing RC's but cant find the rc timer anymore nor option for selection of ans It is a temporary glitch and hope soon it will be sorted out. Thank you |
|
| Author: | Praka [ 29 Nov 2021, 10:54 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, |
Sajjad1994 wrote: Praka wrote: Was practicing RC's but cant find the rc timer anymore nor option for selection of ans It is a temporary glitch and hope soon it will be sorted out. Thank you Oh Sajjad--Thank you soo much that's a relief!! looking forward, thanks for your quick reply. |
|
| Author: | VerbalBot [ 08 Jan 2023, 13:09 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Years before the advent of plate tectonicsthe widely accepted theory, |
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot! Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos). Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email. |
|
| Page 2 of 2 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|