Years before the advent of plate tectonicsthe widely accepted theory

Question

Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, developed in the mid-1960's, the holds that the major features of Earth's surface are created by the horizontal motions of Earth's outer shell, or lithosphere―a similar theory was rejected by the geological community. In 1912, Alfred Wegener proposed, in a widely debated theory that came to be called continental drift, that Earth's continents were mobile. To most geologists today, Wegener's  The origin of Continents and Oceans  appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the  essential presumptions  underlying plate tectonics theory: the horizontal mobility of pieces of Earth's crust; the essential difference between oceanic and continental crust; and a causal connection between horizontal displacements and the formation of mountain chains. Yet despite the  considerable overlap  between Wegener's concepts and the later widely embraced plate tectonics theory, and despite the fact that continental drift theory presented a possible solution to the problem of the origin of mountains at a time when existing explanations were seriously in doubt, in its day Wegener's theory was rejected by the vast majority of geologists.

Most geologists and many historians today believe that Wegener's theory was rejected because of its lack of an adequate mechanical basis. Stephen Jay Gould, for example, argues that continental drift theory was rejected because it did not explain how continents could move through an apparently solid oceanic floor. However, as  Anthony Hallam  has pointed out, many scientific phenomena, such as the ice ages, have been accepted before they could be fully explained. The most likely cause for the rejection of continental drift―a cause that has been largely ignored because we consider Wegener's theory to have been validated by the theory of plate tectonics―is the nature of the evidence that was put forward to support it. Most of Wegener's evidence consisted of homologies―similarities of patterns and forms based on direct observations of rocks in the field, supported by the use of hammers, hand lenses, and field notebooks. In contrast, the data supporting plate tectonics were impressively geophysical―instrumental determinations of the physical properties of Earth garnered through the use of seismographs, magnetometers, and computers.   1 
 VRC00416-04 
 1. The author cites Hallam on the ice ages primarily in order to

(A) provide an example of a geologic phenomenon whose precise causes are not fully understood by geologists today
(B) criticize the geological community for an apparent lack of consistency in its responses to new theories
(C) offer evidence held to undermine a common view of why Wegener’s theory was not accepted in its day
(D) give an example of a modern scientist who believes that Wegener’s theory was rejected because it failed to adequately explain the mechanical basis of continental drift
(E) support Gould’s rationale for why Wegener’s theory was rejected by most geologists in the early twentieth century

2 
 VRC00416-03 
 2. The author of the passage refers to the "considerable overlap" between continental drift theory and plate tectonics theory most probably in order to

(A) suggest that plate tectonics theory is derived from Wegener’s work
(B) introduce a discussion comparing the elements of the two theories
(C) examine the question of whether continental drift theory was innovative in its time
(D) provide a reason why it might seem surprising that continental drift theory was not more widely embraced by geologists
(E) cite an explanation that has been frequently offered for Wegener’s high standing among geologists today

3 
 VRC000416-02 
 3. 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

4 
 VRC00416-01 
 4. It can be inferred from the passage that geologists today would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements about Wegener’s  The Origin of Continents and Oceans ?

(A) It was a worthy scientific effort that was ahead of its time.
(B) It was based on evidence that was later disproved.
(C) It was directly responsible for the acceptance of the theory of plate tectonics.
(D) It has been disproved by continental drift theory.
(E) It misrepresented how horizontal displacements cause the formation of mountain chains.

5 
 VRC00416-05 
 5. The author of the passage most likely discusses the “essential presumptions” (see highlighted text) of The Origin of Continents and Oceans 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 platetectonics

102084  
 
   102085  
 
   102086  
 
   102087  
 
   102088

GMATNinja · Accepted Answer

I don't quite follow your question, but I'm happy to explain the whole question. Question 2 OK, so why did the author bring up the fact that Wegener's continental drift theory has "considerable overlap" with plate tectonics theory? The phrase "considerable overlap" shows up in paragraph 1. The point of this paragraph is to present an apparent contradiction: Wegener's theory included "several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics theory" (which is now widely accepted); yet, Wegener's theory was "rejected by the vast majority of geologists" when it was proposed. Then, in Paragraph 2, the author identifies the most likely cause for that rejection. Here's the precise portion of paragraph 1 where the author mentions "considerable overlap": So, "despite considerable overlap between" Wegener's theory and plate tectonics theory, Wegener's theory was rejected. Here, in support of the paragraph's larger purpose, the author uses "considerable overlap" in order to emphasize the contradiction. After all, since Wegener's theory and plate tectonics theory had so much in common, we should expect that Wegener's theory was accepted ! Yet, despite that expectation, we know that Wegener's theory was rejected by the vast majority of geologists in his time. Choice (D) captures this purpose most clearly, while every other answer choice drifts

away from the purpose of paragraph 1 and how the reference to "considerable overlap" fits into that paragraph. I hope this helps!

alman888 · Answer

My take on question 4 is that the key phrase in the question stem is the title of the book "The Origin of Continents and Oceans" so look for it in the passage. There's only one reference to the book title, which is in the first paragraph, being:   To most geologists today, Wegener's The origin of Continents and Oceans appears an impressive and prescient document  ...

Impressive = worthy scientific effort
Prescient = ahead of its time

That should be enough to point to A. I didn't look at the other answer choices because A directly answered the question, but you can't make the same inference as to what geologists think about the book from the other options (if anything, they refer to other parts of the passage).

Hope that helps!

Ritwick91 · Answer

HI Experts,

Can you please explain why option B is wrong for Q-1 ?

GMATNinja · Answer

The stem for question #1 is: "The author cites Hallam on the ice ages primarily in order to..."

Let's take a look at the relevant piece of the passage:
 
To understand the author's intent, let's look at each piece of this section:

The author introduces a commonly held belief (that "Wegener's theory was rejected because of its lack of an adequate mechanical basis"). 
 Then, he/she cites an example that contradicts this commonly held belief (Anthony Hallam's observation that people accepted phenomena such as ice ages "before they could be fully explained"). 
 Finally, the author offers an alternative reason for the rejection of Wegener's theory ("the nature of the evidence that was put forward to support it").

From this break down, we can see that the author cites Hallam in order to undermine a commonly held belief.

Take another look at (B):
 
The author definitely  points out  the lack of consistency in responses to new theories, but does he/she  criticize  the geological community for this inconsistency?

Not really -- the author is concerned with explaining why the community responded differently to different theories, but does not imply that these different responses are necessarily bad or worthy of criticism. He/she cites Hallam in order to cast doubt on a certain view, not to criticize the geologic community. For this reason, (B) is out.

I hope that helps!

DavidDinh · Answer

Does any one help me explain Q2?
I don't think that "Considerable overlap" is the reason?

Ilhomjon98 · Answer

Before solving question 5, Let's review some Sentence Correction concepts. Note that Never had I thought how important S.C. can be by the time I encountered question 5 on this passage!

Anyway, "comma + V_ing" usually serves three functions:

1) to show "simultaneousness",
2) to delineate "immediate consequence",
3) to give "illustration" or "description" of the main event in the preciding clause.

And, Let's use this S.C. concept to find the correct answer to question 5. By the way, To understand the above-mentioned S.C. concept, Please look at an official question: https://gmatclub.com/forum/for-members- ... 48494.html

And, Ron's explanation: https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... tml#p95167

The relevant the excerpt from the passage:

To most geologists today, Wegener's The origin of Continents and Oceans appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics theory:

As you see, this part uses "comma + V_ing": "... , containing...".

As in the linked S.C. question, "comma + V_ing" describes the preceding clause in the excerpt from the passage:

S.C. question: For members of the seventeenth century Ashanti nation in Africa, "animal-hide shields were essential items of military equipment, protecting warriors"

The excerpt from the passage: To most geologists today, Wegener's The origin of Continents and Oceans appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics theory.

In S.C. quesion, " , protecting warriors" delineate HOW animal-hide shields were essential items" FOR members of Ashanti nation.

Likewise, in the passase, ",containing several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics" illustrates HOW "Wegener's The origin of Continents and Oceans appears" appears an impressive and prescient document TO most geologists.

Hence, The author of the passage discusses the “essential presumptions” most in order to illustrate HOW "Wegener's The origin of Continents and Oceans" appears an impressive and prescient document.

Quote:

(B) show why Wegener's theory is now regarded as prescient

(B) perfectly fits what we have explained.

I hope it could help!

PyjamaScientist · Answer

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.

GMATNinja · Answer

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!

tkorzhan1995 · Answer

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

GMATNinja · Answer

Question 5 
 
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:

To most geologists today, Wegener's The origin of Continents and Oceans appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the  essential presumptions  underlying plate tectonics theory: the horizontal mobility of pieces of Earth's crust...

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):
 
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):
 
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!

bb · Answer

Question #5 in the latest OG, OA switched from B to D. It is a mystery.

inesip · Answer

Hi - question 5 correct answer appear to be D instead of B, I don't understand why it is not B?

GMATNinjaTwo · Answer

bb , weird! Did they change the explanation as well? (I don't yet have the new OG to check myself.) I would stand by eliminating (D) because there was in fact evidence for Wegener's theory: "Most of Wegener's evidence consisted of homologies―similarities of patterns and forms based on direct observations of rocks in the field, supported by the use of hammers, hand lenses, and field notebooks". (B) on the other hand seems like a good fit based on this part: "To most geologists today, Wegener's The origin of Continents and Oceans appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics theory...".

bb · Answer

Hi. Sorry about the wait.

I have looked up the passage. Page 464 of the OG 2025-2026. 
The passage has been modified slightly (seems superficially) but very interesting that it has been modified the way it was. I will see if I can put them side by side and compare.

OLD 
Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, developed in the mid-1960's, the holds that the major features of Earth's surface are created by the horizontal motions of Earth's outer shell, or lithosphere―a similar theory was rejected by the geological community. In 1912, Alfred Wegener proposed, in a widely debated theory that came to be called continental drift, that Earth's continents were mobile. To most geologists today, Wegener's  The origin of Continents and Oceans  appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics theory: the horizontal mobility of pieces of Earth's crust; the essential difference between oceanic and continental crust; and a causal connection between horizontal displacements and the formation of mountain chains. Yet despite the considerable overlap between Wegener's concepts and the later widely embraced plate tectonics theory, and despite the fact that continental drift theory presented a possible solution to the problem of the origin of mountains at a time when existing explanations were seriously in doubt, in its day Wegener's theory was rejected by the vast majority of geologists.

Most geologists and many historians today believe that Wegener's theory was rejected because of its lack of an adequate mechanical basis. Stephen Jay Gould, for example, argues that continental drift theory was rejected because it did not explain how continents could move through an apparently solid oceanic floor. However, as Anthony Hallam has pointed out, many scientific phenomena, such as the ice ages, have been accepted before they could be fully explained. The most likely cause for the rejection of continental drift―a cause that has been largely ignored because we consider Wegener's theory to have been validated by the theory of plate tectonics―is the nature of the evidence that was put forward to support it. Most of Wegener's evidence consisted of homologies―similarities of patterns and forms based on direct observations of rocks in the field, supported by the use of hammers, hand lenses, and field notebooks. In contrast, the data supporting plate tectonics were impressively geophysical―instrumental determinations of the physical properties of Earth garnered through the use of seismographs, magnetometers, and computers.   NEW 
Years before the advent of plate tectonics-the widely accepted theory, developed in the mid-1960s, that holds the major features of Earth's surface are created by the horizontal motions of Earth's outer shell, or lithosphere-a similar theory was rejected by the geological community. In 1912, Alfred Wegener proposed, in a widely debated theory that came to be called continental drift, that Earth's continents were mobile. To most geologists today, Wegener's The Origin of Continents and Oceans appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics theory: the horizontal mobility of pieces of Earth's crust; the essential difference between oceanic and continental crust; and a causal connection between horizontal displacements and the formation of mountain chains.
Yet despite the considerable overlap between Wegener's concepts and the later widely embraced plate tectonics theory, and despite the fact that continental drift theory presented a possible solution to the problem of the origin of mountains at a time when existing explanations were seriously in doubt, in its day Wegener's theory was rejected by the vast majority of geologists.

Most geologists and many historians today believe Wegener's theory was rejected because of its lack of an adequate mechanical basis.  A group of researchers  argues continental drift theory was rejected because it did not explain how continents could move through an apparently solid oceanic floor. However, as Anthony Hallam has pointed out, many scientific phenomena, such as the ice ages, have been accepted before they could be fully explained. The most likely cause for the rejection of continental drift—a cause that has been largely ignored because we consider Wegener's theory to have been validated by the theory of plate tectonics— is the nature of the evidence that was put forward to support it. Most of Wegener's evidence consisted of homologies-similarities of patterns and forms based on direct observations of rocks in the field,  supported by the use of hammers, hand lenses, and field notebooks. In contrast, the data supporting plate tectonics were impressively geophysical: instrumental determinations of the physical properties of Earth garnered through the use of seismographs and magnetometers.

I have bolded the differences.  
The OA for the 5th Question The author of the passage most likely discusses the "essential presumptions" of the Origins of Continents and Oceans in order to (see lines 12-13) has been changed from D to B

B) Show why Wegener's theory os now regarded as prescient. 
 D) Cite features of the theory of continental drift for which no evidence was available in Wegener's day

Explanation:  
The context of the phrase "essential presumptions" indicates that the author's purpose is to show how Wegener anticipated some of the important ideas in plate tectonics and was therefore prescient.

GMATNinjaTwo , let me know if you figure out this mystery!

GMATNinjaTwo · Answer

bb , that's the explanation in the latest OG? That still sounds like an explanation for why (B) is correct ("... and was therefore prescient ."). Odd that they made those minor changes to the passages, but I don't see those as having any impact on Q5. I'm inclined to wait this one out a bit to see if they change the OA back to (B), before doing mental gymnastics to explain why (D) works.

Rohanx9 · Answer

bb , seems like the answer is still B? See screenshot from GMAT Official Guide 2025-2026 https://gmatclub.com/forum/download/file.php?id=84982 GMAT-Club-Forum-xvh6ju5l.png

Bunuel · Answer

That's weird. Changing the answer back to B. Thank you.

P.S. If anyone has screenshot proving otherwise please share.

Years before the advent of plate tectonicsthe widely accepted theory

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 Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

Years before the advent of plate tectonicsthe widely accepted theory

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