Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 21:00 It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 21:00
Close
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
joshnsit
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Last visit: 19 Oct 2017
Posts: 231
Own Kudos:
1,445
 [20]
Given Kudos: 34
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Posts: 231
Kudos: 1,445
 [20]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
17
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
IanStewart
User avatar
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Last visit: 17 Apr 2026
Posts: 4,143
Own Kudos:
11,275
 [6]
Given Kudos: 99
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,143
Kudos: 11,275
 [6]
6
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
avatar
gmatstalker2012
Joined: 25 Aug 2012
Last visit: 03 Jun 2013
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
2
 [1]
Posts: 9
Kudos: 2
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
joshnsit
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Last visit: 19 Oct 2017
Posts: 231
Own Kudos:
1,445
 [2]
Given Kudos: 34
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Posts: 231
Kudos: 1,445
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gmatstalker2012
Hey....new kid on the block

I would go with B ... This option talks about non extinction of animals from the same species as the dinosaurs ...for me makes sense and weakens the argument

The option D also talks about non extinction of animals of the same era, but these animals are of different species and so might have naturally adapted to the change in environment
B is obviously better than D. But, why couldnt it be A or C then? They also give different causes of dinosaur's death weakening the conclusion.
User avatar
joshnsit
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Last visit: 19 Oct 2017
Posts: 231
Own Kudos:
1,445
 [1]
Given Kudos: 34
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Posts: 231
Kudos: 1,445
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
IanStewart
Yes, the answer is B. If dinosaurs would be unable to survive the aftermath of a comet, you'd expect the same to be true of similar animals, so B casts doubt on the theory. As for the other answers you asked about:

A just says "some people don't agree with the comet theory". You can rule those types of answers out right away. Whether a few people disagree with the theory is irrelevant; we need facts to weaken an argument, not opinions.

C just says "studying dinosaur skeletons doesn't help us to evaluate the theory". So skeletons don't give us any information about the comet theory. So C neither strengthens nor weakens the argument. If C instead said that a study of skeletons gives reason to think dinosaurs died from an alternative cause, then C would be a good answer, but that's not what it says.
@IanStewart. Though your comment about choice A makes sense, this info was new to me. To make your statement about choice A explicit, can we safely state that "Any opinion/belief/claim by an authority, whatever the status and credentials of the authority are, can't be used to disprove or raise doubt on author's opinion/belief/claim in an argument." ?
User avatar
shreerajp99
Joined: 06 Jun 2010
Last visit: 07 Dec 2013
Posts: 143
Own Kudos:
49
 [1]
Given Kudos: 151
Posts: 143
Kudos: 49
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
No,it doesn't work that way.Its just that the below statement is not strong enough to weaken the author's claim.
"One of the various schools of paleontology adheres to an explanation for the disappearance of the dinosaurs that is significantly different from the comet theory."
Also,in this statement,its just mentioned generally that the explanation differs to author's statement.If something concrete would've been mentioned,say something such as "X theory has stated that disappearance of dinosaurs took place because of Y reason" then we could have selected A.

Hope it helps,
Thanks!
User avatar
IanStewart
User avatar
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Last visit: 17 Apr 2026
Posts: 4,143
Own Kudos:
11,275
 [1]
Given Kudos: 99
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,143
Kudos: 11,275
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
joshnsit
@IanStewart. Though your comment about choice A makes sense, this info was new to me. To make your statement about choice A explicit, can we safely state that "Any opinion/belief/claim by an authority, whatever the status and credentials of the authority are, can't be used to disprove or raise doubt on author's opinion/belief/claim in an argument." ?

In this question, A is particularly unhelpful, because all it says is that some people disagree with the theory. That's generally true about most theories. I suppose in a similar question, if one answer said something like "most experts who have researched this issue disagree with the theory", that kind of answer would help to weaken the argument. But for GMAT purposes, I don't think that matters -- I don't think I've ever seen a real GMAT question where that type of 'appeal to universal authority' answer was even among the answer choices. In every real GMAT weakening question I've seen, the correct answer is based on flaws or gaps in the argument itself, and not on the opinions of experts. And whenever I've seen answers that read something like "some people think X", those answers are never correct, because the logical force of an argument is not substantially diminished by the opinions of a few people.
User avatar
namita_am
Joined: 07 Sep 2017
Last visit: 06 Jan 2019
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
7
 [1]
Given Kudos: 144
Posts: 8
Kudos: 7
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Could somebody give a detailed explanation for why D is wrong?

I am confused between B and D.
User avatar
Wonderwoman31
Joined: 21 Apr 2018
Last visit: 22 Apr 2023
Posts: 53
Own Kudos:
46
 [1]
Given Kudos: 82
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V35
GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42
GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42
Posts: 53
Kudos: 46
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
joshnsit
gmatstalker2012
Hey....new kid on the block

I would go with B ... This option talks about non extinction of animals from the same species as the dinosaurs ...for me makes sense and weakens the argument

The option D also talks about non extinction of animals of the same era, but these animals are of different species and so might have naturally adapted to the change in environment
B is obviously better than D. But, why couldnt it be A or C then? They also give different causes of dinosaur's death weakening the conclusion.

Hi joshnsit

Could you please tell OA ? I would go with C
User avatar
nightblade354
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Last visit: 22 Apr 2026
Posts: 1,769
Own Kudos:
7,116
 [2]
Given Kudos: 3,305
Status:He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Going to Business School -- Corruptus in Extremis
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,769
Kudos: 7,116
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Question edited and OA added. This is an LSAT question, by the way.
avatar
Sneha333
Joined: 24 Mar 2019
Last visit: 21 Feb 2020
Posts: 34
Own Kudos:
24
 [1]
Given Kudos: 9
Posts: 34
Kudos: 24
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I am not sure about B.

Argument is talking only about Dinosaurs not other species.
Species similar to Dinosaur may or may not survive in conditions specified but it will not weaken the argument.Even if we negate this it will not strengthen the argument.

If we negate choice A,it will strengthen the argument and hence is a weaker in original state.
avatar
Diya52
Joined: 21 Nov 2018
Last visit: 26 May 2025
Posts: 112
Own Kudos:
129
 [2]
Given Kudos: 123
Location: India
GPA: 3.5
Products:
Posts: 112
Kudos: 129
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can someone tell me why "D) Many other animal species from the era of the dinosaurs did not become extinct at the same time the dinosaurs did." is not the correct answer? One possible explanation could be : since era is a long time period, it could mean that they existed in the same "era" as dinosaurs but didnt necessarily exist when the extinction happened. Is my thinking correct?
User avatar
nightblade354
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Last visit: 22 Apr 2026
Posts: 1,769
Own Kudos:
7,116
 [4]
Given Kudos: 3,305
Status:He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Going to Business School -- Corruptus in Extremis
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,769
Kudos: 7,116
 [4]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A plausible explanation of the disappearance of the dinosaurs is what is known as the comet theory. A large enough comet colliding with Earth could have caused a cloud of dust that enshrouded the planet and cooled the climate long enough to result in the dinosaur's demise.

Premise: A large enough comet colliding with Earth could have caused a cloud of dust that enshrouded the planet and cooled the climate long enough to result in the dinosaur's demise.
Conclusion: A plausible explanation of the disappearance of the dinosaurs is what is known as the comet theory

OK, so pretty straightforward argument. Honestly, given the amount of ways the LSAT could have spun this, it is best not try and "pre-think" this one out and just hope to see an alternate explanation or a weakener.


Which of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A) One of the various schools of paleontology adheres to an explanation for the disappearance of the dinosaurs that is significantly different from the comet theory. -- OK, cool. So these two theories aren't compatible. But, who cares? There could be 50,000 theories that agree with us. So this ridiculous. Out.

B) Various species of animals from the same as dinosaurs and similar to them in physiology and habitat did not become extinct when dinosaurs did. -- I am usually skeptical of comparison answers, but let's analyze this a little more. It is a similar species, with similar living conditions, and yet they didn't go extinct. Hmm. They are similar in almost every way but the name. This does weaken it, because these fake-twins stayed around and our Dinos didn't. Both would have needed to go extinct to not weaken this. Bingo!

C) It can not be determined from a study of dinosaur skeletons whether the animals died from the effects of a dust cloud. -- Tricky answer choice. They are trying to make you assume that because we do not know if something occurred, that it didn't occur. But this cannot be assumed! Maybe we just don't have the technology to analyze the bones, but they really did die from this. We just don't know. Out.

D) Many other animal species from the era of the dinosaurs did not become extinct at the same time the dinosaurs did. -- This is why I pause with comparison answers. Look at this and please realize why this is different then B. These animal species could be completely different than our dinos. They could be a super species that developed a resistance to clouds and somehow learned to absorb dust for energy. The species are not the same, so they could be completely, ridiculously different. When species go extinct today on Earth, does every species go extinct? No. This is why this is wrong. We adapt to situations, just as these other species could. Out.

E) The consequences for the vegetation and animals of comet colliding with Earth are not fully understood. -- Once more, who cares? Does this mean the vegetation died off? And if so, does that meant the dinos were dependent on plants? We cannot make these assumptions. Out.
User avatar
Pankaj0901
Joined: 18 Dec 2018
Last visit: 17 Dec 2022
Posts: 406
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 737
Location: India
WE:Account Management (Hospitality and Tourism)
Posts: 406
Kudos: 53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I am not able to eliminate option E
Quote:
E) The consequences for the vegetation and animals of comet colliding with Earth are not fully understood.
If consequences are not well understood, we cannot conclude anything about the impact of the collision on animals (I understand, it's irrelevant for vegetation), thus weakening the conclusion, right?

(I understand why B is right - so no issues there.)

IanStewart - Could you please shed some light on this? Thank you
User avatar
IanStewart
User avatar
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Last visit: 17 Apr 2026
Posts: 4,143
Own Kudos:
11,275
 [1]
Given Kudos: 99
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,143
Kudos: 11,275
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Pankaj0901
I am not able to eliminate option E
Quote:
E) The consequences for the vegetation and animals of comet colliding with Earth are not fully understood.
If consequences are not well understood, we cannot conclude anything about the impact of the collision on animals (I understand, it's irrelevant for vegetation), thus weakening the conclusion, right?

IanStewart - Could you please shed some light on this? Thank you

First, be careful about rephrasing -- answer E says the consequences are "not fully understood", which is very different from saying the consequences are "not well understood". But more importantly, answer E says roughly "we don't know everything yet", but that's something we knew was true before reading the answer choices; if we did understand everything perfectly, we wouldn't need to speculate about why dinosaurs became extinct, because we'd know why it happened. So answer E can't really have any effect on the argument. You're really looking for a specific reason to doubt the argument in a question like this (as B provides), not an answer that says "scientists don't have a complete picture of how things work."
User avatar
Pankaj0901
Joined: 18 Dec 2018
Last visit: 17 Dec 2022
Posts: 406
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 737
Location: India
WE:Account Management (Hospitality and Tourism)
Posts: 406
Kudos: 53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thank you so much, Ian. I think I got the point. :thumbsup:

IanStewart
Pankaj0901
I am not able to eliminate option E
Quote:
E) The consequences for the vegetation and animals of comet colliding with Earth are not fully understood.
If consequences are not well understood, we cannot conclude anything about the impact of the collision on animals (I understand, it's irrelevant for vegetation), thus weakening the conclusion, right?

IanStewart - Could you please shed some light on this? Thank you

First, be careful about rephrasing -- answer E says the consequences are "not fully understood", which is very different from saying the consequences are "not well understood". But more importantly, answer E says roughly "we don't know everything yet", but that's something we knew was true before reading the answer choices; if we did understand everything perfectly, we wouldn't need to speculate about why dinosaurs became extinct, because we'd know why it happened. So answer E can't really have any effect on the argument. You're really looking for a specific reason to doubt the argument in a question like this (as B provides), not an answer that says "scientists don't have a complete picture of how things work."
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 19,424
Own Kudos:
Posts: 19,424
Kudos: 1,010
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
501 posts
358 posts