Reading Comprehension: Chapter 7, passage C

[chaitanya.mehrotra]

Passag.e C: Life on Mars
Because of the proximity and likeness of Mars
to Earth, scientists have long speculated about the
possibility of life on Mars. As early as the mid-17th
century, astronomers observed polar ice caps on
Mars, and by the mid-19th century, scientists discovered other similarities to Earth, including the length of
day and axial tilt. But in 1965, photos taken by the
Mariner 4 probe revealed a Mars without rivers,
oceans or signs of life. And in the 1990s, it was discovered that Mars, unlike Earth, no longer possessed
a substantial global magnetic field, allowing celestial
radiation to reach the planet's surface and solar wind
to eliminate much of Mars's atmosphere over the
course of several billion years.
More recent probes have focused on whether
there was once water on Mars. Some scientists
believe that this question is definitively answered by
the presence of certain geological landforms. Others
posit that different explanations, such as wind erosion
or carbon dioxide oceans, may be responsible for
these formations. Mars rovers Opportunity and Spirit,
which have been exploring the surface of Mars since
2004, have both discovered geological evidence of
past water activity. These findings substantially bolster
claims that there was once life on Mars.
1. The author's stance on the possibility of life on Mars can best be described as
(A) optimistic
(B) disinterested
(C) skeptical
(D) simplistic
(E) cynic
-> The answer explained in the book is B (Author is disinterested) but in the last sentence of the Passage author makes a supporting remark: "These findings substantially bolster
claims that there was once life on Mars". Can someone please clarify.

[messi10]

Hi,

It is a bit strange to use the word disinterested but as the book suggests, the primary meaning of that word is "impartial" or "neutral".

The last sentence that you point out is just one evidence that supports the possibility of the life on Mars. Basically the second paragraph builds up to the point that there could have been life on Mars. The first paragraph has reasons to support the contrary.

More importantly, don't forget that the author is presenting facts in this passage, not his own opinion. So overall, the tone of the passage is neutral or "disinterested"

Sunil

[tim]

thanks, Sunil!

[nonameee]

I've learnt from previous posts that tone questions are no longer present in the GMAT. However, can someone please explain why we cannot infer from the last sentence that the author's stance on the possibility of life on Mars is optimistic (after all, he does use words "...these findings substantially bolster claims that ...")?

Sunil's answer didn't persuade me that this answer is incorrect.

Thank you.

[saurabhguptausa]

Hello,

This post may be little off topic, but I didn't want to create a separate thread as my question belongs to this passage only.

In question 3, option C uses a word "currently". However, in the passage and in the explanation as well, the evidence mentioned is from 1965 to prove that the water activity was not present. Could you please tell me why "currently" is not referring to the present time. If it does refer to the present time, how is this choice not the correct answer for this question?

I chose option C thinking that passage mentions water activities in 1965, and doesn't mention the activities in the present(current time period), so this should be the correct answer. Although I agree with the explanation that option A doesn't mention discovery, but IMO the answer choice C is also misleading.

[nonameee]

Technically speaking, your logic has merit. "In 1965 photos revealed a Mars without rivers, oceans, or signs of life." So it is possible that there is water on Mars now.

However, in light of this sentence: "More recent probes have focused on whether there was once water on Mars.", one can conclude that the author assumes that there is still no water on Mars. However, I have to say, the sentence says that the probes have focused on the past, not current situation.

On the other hand, this kind of thinking goes too far in my opinion and is rather questionable/debatable. Whereas option (A) is fully supported by the passage; and, therefore, is a better choice.

[nonameee]

Also, to make the argument valid, the author can assume whatever he wants, and in this case the author does assume that Mars currently has no water activity (it can be inferred from the sentence that I pointed out in my previous post).

It would still be great to hear an expert opinion on this one.

[StaceyKoprince]

Hi, all

Let's see, a couple of questions upthread.

First, on the tone question, nonameee, I agree that you could make an argument for either answer A or answer B, although I think (if these questions were still on the GMAT), that they'd probably lean towards B on this one. As Sunil noted, the question asks for the author's opinion. The first paragraph provides evidence against the "life on Mars" theory and the second provides evidence for the theory. The author's opinion encompasses all of that data. The last sentence is the strongest one in favor of answer A, but the author merely says that the evidence "bolsters claims" (made by others, not the author).

Note: they've pretty much killed tone questions at this point, so really don't worry about it. :)

For the other question, it seems that you guys are referring to a question that isn't actually listed in any of the posts in this thread. We'd be happy to discuss - but do post the question. We have limited time on the forums, so we need to be able to answer in as streamlined a way as possible, and that requires the question text itself to be posted here. (Plus it helps other students to follow the discussion.) Thanks!

[sonygmat]

Question 5: Each of the following can be inferred from the passage EXCEPT

A. The presence of certain geological landforms is not definitive proof that there was once life on Mars.
B. It is likely that there were few significant discoveries related to the possibility of life on Mars prior to the mid-17th century
C.The absence of substantial global magnetic field on Mars suggests that it would be difficult to sustain life on Mars,
D.The presence of water activity on Mars is related to the possibility of life on Mars.
E. The claim that there was once water on Mars has only limited and indirect support from recent discoveries

I can understand that choice E could be a correct answer, what I can't understand is why B and C are excluded.

Regarding answer choice B:

B. The text states that "As early as the mid-17th century,...". How can we conclude from the aforementioned part that it is likely that there were a few discoveries prior to that date?

Regarding answer choice C:

C. Regarding this AC, I want to report a mistake that is not mentioned in http://www.manhattangmat.com/errata.cfm

In the explanation of this AC, the author of the book states "In the second paragraph..." but there is no mention on global magnetic in the second paragraph.

Now as far as why we should exclude this answer choice:

From the passage (last sentence of the first paragraph) I can infer that Mars used to have a magnetic field. Should I have also inferred from the fact that Mars's atmosphere has been eliminated over the years, that it can't sustain life?

I would really appreciate an experts' input on why we should exclude B and C.

Moreover, I have a question regarding Authors' tone related questions in Reading Comprehension.

Are those questions still tested? Because from the previous posts I understood that something might have changed.

I would really appreciate a fast response, if possible, because I am like a week away from taking the GMAT.

Thanks

[tim]

We actually DON'T want to conclude from the passage that there were A FEW discoveries before the 17th Century, as you ask in your post. The question says there were FEW such discoveries, which is very different from A FEW. Few discoveries means there wasn't much of note going on before the 17th Century, and this is definitely implied by the passage saying that discoveries occurred as early as the 17th Century..

As for C, the passage indicates that the lack of magnetic field leads to more radiation and less atmosphere. If it weren't already obvious that these are not conducive to life, the fact that the passage brings up those issues in this context should indicate that they are hostile to life..

I wouldn't worry much about tone questions these days..

[sonygmat]

We actually DON'T want to conclude from the passage that there were A FEW discoveries before the 17th Century, as you ask in your post. The question says there were FEW such discoveries, which is very different from A FEW. Few discoveries means there wasn't much of note going on before the 17th Century, and this is definitely implied by the passage saying that discoveries occurred as early as the 17th Century..

As for C, the passage indicates that the lack of magnetic field leads to more radiation and less atmosphere. If it weren't already obvious that these are not conducive to life, the fact that the passage brings up those issues in this context should indicate that they are hostile to life..

I wouldn't worry much about tone questions these days..

Thanks a lot for the fast response!

Few vs A few is a difference that I will know from now on!

[tim]

glad to hear it!