
Reading Passage Question
Take a very commonplace, often discussed and critical topic: Are we detecting a greenhouse effect, and related to this, is it exacerbated by "homogenic factors," i.e., human actions? Most would be inclined to give a positive answer to both of these questions. But, if pushed, what would be the evidence, and how well grounded would it be for such affirmations?
Within scientific communities and associated scientifically informed circles, the answers have to be somewhat more ambiguous, particularly when rigorous questions concerning evidence are raised. Were scientific truth to be a matter of consensus, and some argue that scientific truth often turns out to be just that, then it is clear that there is beginning to be a kind of majority consensus among many earth science practitioners that the temperature of the Earth, particularly of the oceans, is indeed rising and that this is a crucial indicator for a possible greenhouse effect.
Most of these scientists admit that the mean oceanic temperature has risen globally in the last several decades. But this generalization depends upon how accurate measurements may be, not just for samples, but also for the whole Earth. Hot spots, for example the now four year old hot spot near New Guinea which is part of the El Niño cycle, does not count by itself because it might be balanced by cold spots elsewhere. And the fact of the matter is that "whole earth measurements" are still rare and primitive in the simple sense that we simply do not have enough thermometers out. Secondly, even if we had enough thermometers, a simple synchronic whole earth measurement over three decades is but a blip in the diachronic history of ice age cycles over the last tens of thousands of years. Thirdly, even if we know that the earth is now heating up, has an ever increasing ozone hole, and from this strange weather effects can be predicted, how much of this is due to homogenic factors, such as CFCs, CO2 increases, hydrocarbon burning, and the like? Is it really the case, as Science magazine claimed in l990, "24% of greenhouse encouraging gasses are of homogenic origin"?
“Take a very commonplace, often discussed and critical topic” - is a GMAT reading comprehension passage with answers. Candidates need a strong knowledge of English GMAT reading comprehension.
This GMAT Reading Comprehension consists of 5 comprehension questions. GMAT reading Comprehension passages take advantage when students encounter unfamiliar words. It can be a real blow to confidence, making them question whether they can complete the task at hand. Practice can help candidates learn some of the jargon associated with weaker areas. Candidates can actively prepare with the help of GMAT Reading Comprehension Practice Questions.
Solution and Explanation
Answer: B
Explanation: This statement helps determine how well established the greenhouse effect is. The degree to which human activities are contributing to its worsening. Hence option B is the correct answer.
Answer: D
Explanation: If the oceans' temperatures have been measured with a high enough degree of precision. Then it will be feasible to determine whether or not there has been a rise in the average temperatures of the world's oceans over the last few decades. Hence option D is the correct answer.
Answer: A
Explanation: We cannot declare with absolute confidence that strange weather patterns resulting from the Earth are growing hotter. The ozone hole is getting wider since both are happening simultaneously. Hence option A is the correct answer.
Answer: D
Explanation: In the above question it is shown that a mean of more than thirty years is necessary. It is required to identify substantial shifts in weather patterns. Hence option D is the appropriate answer choice.
Suggested GMAT Reading Comprehension Samples
*The article might have information for the previous academic years, please refer the official website of the exam.