In Peru, ancient disturbances in the dark surface material of a desert

Question

In Peru, ancient disturbances in the dark surface material of a desert show up as light-colored lines that are the width of a footpath and stretch for long distances. One group of lines branching out like rays from a single point crosses over curved lines that form a very large bird figure. Interpreting the lines in the desert as landing strips for spaceship-traveling aliens, an investigator argues that they could hardly have been Inca roads, asking, “What use to the Inca would have been closely spaced roads that ran parallel? That intersected in a sunburst pattern? That came abruptly to an end in the middle of an uninhabited plain.”

The argumentative strategy of the investigator quoted is to

(A) reject out of hand direct counter evidence to the investigator’s own interpretation

(B) introduce evidence newly discovered by the investigator which discredits the alternative interpretation

(C) support one interpretation by calling into question the plausibility of the alternative interpretation

(D) challenge the investigative methods used by those who developed the alternative interpretation

(E) show that the two competing interpretations can be reconciled with one another

angel2009 · Answer

First one is correct but any explanation for the second one?

sidhu4u · Answer

1. C - he supports his interpretation by questioning why the Incas would have built closely spaced roads so parallel, etc.
2. B - not sure about this, but it looks like the only option which brings some sort of relation between the straight lines and the bird figure.

What is the answer?

alexBLR · Answer

First question: C
Second question: B

In the second question answer B states that streight lines represent part of the more complex structure of lines in which the "bird lines" are also the part of the more complex structure. Therefore, this statement "counters an objection that the crossing of the straight-line pattern over the bird figure shows that the two kinds of line pattern served unrelated purposes".

seekmba · Answer

these questions are killer....did not even understand the overall meaning of premise.

rohitgoel15 · Answer

Can anyone explain what the premise says? I dont even get that. :oops:

What does the last part of the argument says?

YangYichen · Answer

i got u in the second explanation thx a lot :twisted:

sayantanc2k · Answer

The pattern discovered could have served 2 purposes:
1. Roads
2. Landing strips for spaceships

The investigator has the opinion that the second hypothesis (landing strips) is correct.

Premise for the above opinion: Closely spaced parallel roads abruptly ending in uninhabited land is useless as roads - hence they must have been landing strips.

Option C is correct.

OA added.

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

In Peru, ancient disturbances in the dark surface material of a desert

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

In Peru, ancient disturbances in the dark surface material of a desert

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