PrepTest 40, Section 2, Question 4
Anne: Halley's Comet, now in a part of its orbit relatively far from the Sun, recently flared brightly enough to be seen by telescope. No comet has ever been observed to flare so far from the Sun before, so such a flare must be highly unusual.
Anne: Halley's Comet, now in a part of its orbit relatively far from the Sun, recently flared brightly enough to be seen by telescope. No comet has ever been observed to flare so far from the Sun before, so such a flare must be highly unusual.
Sue: Nonsense. Usually no one bothers to try to observe comets when they are so far from the Sun. This flare was observed only because an observatory was tracking Halley's Comet very carefully.
Anne: Halley's Comet, now in a part of its orbit relatively far from the Sun, recently flared brightly enough to be seen by telescope. No comet has ever been observed to flare so far from the Sun before, so such a flare must be highly unusual.
Sue: Nonsense. Usually no one bothers to try to observe comets when they are so far from the Sun. This flare was observed only because an observatory was tracking Halley's Comet very carefully.
Anne: Halley's Comet, now in a part of its orbit relatively far from the Sun, recently flared brightly enough to be seen by telescope. No comet has ever been observed to flare so far from the Sun before, so such a flare must be highly unusual.
Sue challenges Anne's reasoning by
pointing out that Anne's use of the term "observed" is excessively vague
drawing attention to an inconsistency between two of Anne's claims
presenting evidence that directly contradicts Anne's evidence
offering an alternative explanation for the evidence Anne cites
undermining some of Anne's evidence while agreeing with her conclusion
Explanations
Anne argues that the recently observed flare from Halley's comet must be unusual because no comet has ever been observed to flare as far from the sun as Halley's comet did.
Sue thinks Anne's full of it. Sue bases her disagreement on the premise that we don't commonly pay attention to comets as far from the sun as Halley's comet just so happened to be in this instance. In other words, the flare observation was probably commonplace and little more than a coincidence.
It's a disagree question, specifically regarding how Sue responds to Anne. I'm predicting something like, "Gives an alternative explanation of the events discussed."
Let's go find it.
No, Sue asking Anne, "Well what do you mean by 'observed,' exactly?"
No, this would mean Sue points out some sort of contradiction between Anne's pieces of evidence. Anne's evidence is consistent, it just doesn't totally prove her conclusion.
No, for Sue's evidence to directly contradict Anne's, either Anne would have had to say observers weren't carefully watching Halley's comet or Sue would have had to point out a comet we've seen flare such and such distance from the sun by telescope.
Perfect. Yes. Sue offers an alternative explanation for us never having seen a comet flare this way before.
No, Sue disagrees with Anne's conclusion.
0 Comments