To the editor: In 1960, an astronomer proposed a mathematical model

Question

To the editor: In 1960, an astronomer proposed a mathematical model for determining whether extraterrestrial life exists. It was based on the assumptions that life as we know it could exist only on a planet and that many stars are, like our Sun, orbited by planets. On the basis that there are nine planets in our solar system and one of them has life as we know it, the astronomer predicted that there are as many as one million extraterrestrial civilizations across all solar systems. Yet astronomers to date have not detected even one planet outside our solar system. This indicates that the astronomer's model is wrong, and life as we know it exists only on the planet Earth.
- Clay Moltz

Which one of the following, if accepted by Clay Moltz, would require him to reconsider his conclusion?

(A) Forms of life other than life as we know it exist on other planets.
(B) There are many stars that are not orbited by planets.
(C) Detecting planets outside our solar system requires more sophisticated instruments than are currently available.
(D) The soundness of the conclusion reached by applying a mathematical model depends on the soundness of the assumptions on which the model is based.
(E) Due to sheer distances and expanses of space involved, any extraterrestrial civilization would have great difficulty communicating with ours.

chrisbender · Answer

Without knowing who Clay is it makes it difficult. If he is responding to the initial astronomer's claim, then yes C makes sense. Just because we haven't found other planets doesn't mean that they do not exist. It's a parallel to the black swan theory. E is tempting, but for all we know aliens have been trying to communicate with us for years, and we just haven't been able to pick up on it. (I don't actually believe this, but for the sake of argument)

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

The conclusion that we’re directed to make Clay  “reconsider”  is signaled by the phrase  “This indicates that...,”  and the gist of it is that it’s a rebuttal: For Clay, life as we know it exists nowhere but on Earth, despite the astronomer’s prediction that lots of life is to be found on planets Out There.

Notice that Clay spends most of his letter describing the astronomer’s thought process. He provides only one piece of counter evidence, and it’s this: No single planet outside of our own solar system has been found. On that absence of evidence hangs Clay’s stubborn, categorical insistence that We Are Alone. Well, he’d have to back off if, as  (C)  states, the reason that no other planets have been found is not that they don’t exist, but that we don’t yet have the means to find them. If  (C)  is true, then until such time as adequate means of detection is developed, the astronomer’s prediction is unscathed and will have to stand.

(A)  sounds like a capitulation on Clay’s part, but it’s really outside the scope. The point at issue between Clay and the astronomer is whether life as we know it exists elsewhere than Earth. Clay could concede the existence of (A)’s weird life forms and still argue that the astronomer is wrong.

(B)  Planets and a star like the Sun are, to the astronomer, necessary for life as we know it to exist. That some stars may be planet-less has no effect on either the astronomer’s logic or Clay’s.

(D)  is something that Clay already accepts as true—his whole rebuttal hinges on his belief that it’s the astronomer’s faulty assumption (about other planets) that renders the prediction worthless. Since (D) is in synch with Clay’s reasoning, it cannot serve to make him reconsider that reasoning.

(E)  is irrelevant. So communication between us and E.T. would be tough, eh. Would it be impossible? What has this to do with whether life as we know it does or does not exist?

Answer: C

Hope it helps

TheNightKing · Answer

SajjadAhmad

Sorry but the passage needs to make it clear who is Clay Moltz? Is the editor to whom the letter is written? Is it the astronomer himself? Or Is it the person writing to the Editor?

I hope our question is reasonable.

CC  Bunuel   GMATNinja

analytica233 · Answer

The question says that "Which one of the following, if accepted by Clay Moltz, would require HIM to reconsider HIS CONCLUSION? This means that Clay Moltz is the person who brings about THE CONCLUSION in the argument. As the argument goes, THE CONCLUSION of the argument is "This indicates that the astronomer's model is wrong, and life as we know it exists only on the planet Earth." Hence, our task is to find the answer choice that, if accepted by Clay Moltz, would weaken his conclusion above.

TheNightKing · Answer

analytica233

I see what you are saying here and that definitely makes sense.

May be I was thrown off by the name and the fact that I have not seen this kind of question before? And add to it the fact that question is on the higher difficulty side.

I will revisit the question in some time.

Thanks!

analytica233 · Answer

You're welcome, man. Do not let the difficulty label make you anxious. Just keep studying and sharpening your established way of CR reasoning, and one day everything just "clicks" and makes sense.

Cav · Answer

Noticed that the question, as it is posted right now, has some spelling mistakes and doesn't mention who Clay Moltz is. This is how the question appears in the official LSAT:

To the Editor:

In 1960, an astronomer proposed a mathematical model for determining whether extraterrestrial life exists. It was based on the assumptions that life as we know it could exist only on a planet and that many stars are, like our Sun, orbited by planets. On the basis that there are nine planets in our solar system and one of them has life as we know it, the astronomer predicted that there are as many as one million extraterrestrial civilizations across all solar systems. Yet astronomers to date have not detected even one planet outside our solar system. This indicates that the astronomer's model is wrong, and life as we know it exists only on the planet Earth.

-  Clay Moltz

Which one of the following, if accepted by Clay Moltz, would require him to reconsider his conclusion?

(A) Forms of life other than life as we know it exist on other planets.
(B) There are many stars that are not orbited by planets.
(C) Detecting planets outside our solar system requires more sophisticated instruments than are currently available.
(D) The soundness of the conclusion reached by applying a mathematical model depends on the soundness of the assumptions on which the model is based.
(E) Due to sheer distances and expanses of space involved, any extraterrestrial civilization would have great difficulty communicating with ours.

I request  Sajjad1994  or  Bunuel  to please make the corrections.

Bunuel · Answer

__________________________
Fixed the issues. Thank you!

unraveled · Answer

To the editor: In 1960, an astronomer proposed a mathematical model for determining whether extraterrestrial life exists. It was based on the assumptions that life as we know it could exist only on a planet and that many stars are, like our Sun, orbited by planets. On the basis that there are nine planets in our solar system and one of them has life as we know it, the astronomer predicted that there are as many as one million extraterrestrial civilizations across all solar systems. Yet astronomers to date have not detected even one planet outside our solar system. This indicates that the astronomer's model is wrong, and life as we know it exists only on the planet Earth.
- Clay Moltz

Which one of the following, if accepted by Clay Moltz, would require him to reconsider his conclusion?

(A) Forms of  life other than life as we know it exist  on other planets. - WRONG. Irrelevant as it's out of scope.
(B) There are  many stars that are not orbited by planets . - WRONG. Again loses focus of the passage.
(C)  Detecting planets  outside our solar system  requires more sophisticated instruments than are currently available . - CORRECT. If true than there is a possibility that planets are there where life form as we know it exists. 
(D) The  soundness of the conclusion reached by applying a mathematical model depends  on the soundness of the assumptions on which the model is based. - WRONG. Whatever the model be it is not CM's concern. 
(E) Due to sheer distances and expanses of space involved, any  extraterrestrial civilization would have great difficulty communicating with ours . - WRONG. It is use who are looking not ET civilization.

First of all, for me this is totally a new way a question stem is presented. 
Basically, it is asking what might be an assumption(sort of, though not exactly) that the passage ignored. OR which of the options impacts the passage to not conclude as concluded. Only C does that.

Answer C.

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.

To the editor: In 1960, an astronomer proposed a mathematical model

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

To the editor: In 1960, an astronomer proposed a mathematical model

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