Official Explanation

Argument Evaluation

What new information, if added to the argument, would strengthen it?

The argument sets forth a novel hypothesis about how oil reserves are created. That is, oil reserves are created through bacterial action on complex hydrocarbons within the earth rather than through chemical transformation of hydrocarbons derived from organisms buried under ancient seas.

The argument notes that the volume of the hydrocarbons that bacteria transform to yield oil is greater than the volume of hydrocarbons derived from the buried organisms and concludes that total oil reserves are greater than most geologists believe them to be.

A. This suggests that most geologists might, if anything, be inclined to overestimate oil reserves. However, this consideration has little bearing on the chemical origin of oil or how much oil may remain buried in the earth.

B. This does not tell us whether the chemical analyses can identify whether the oil originated from hydrocarbons derived from buried organisms.

C. The existence of buried ancient seas has little, if any, relevance to the argument. This choice fails to provide evidence that by itself would help decide whether the hypothesized bacterial origin of oil actually supports the inference that oil reserves are greater than is currently assumed.

D. This suggests that bacteria have been found in some oil reserves; the potential importance of this discovery is unclear.

E. Correct. This strengthens the argument: if it is true, then the greater abundance of complex hydrocarbons from which it is hypothesized that oil can be derived through bacterial action would predict much larger oil reserves than exist under most geologists' current predictions.

The correct answer is E.