ChaseDream

标题: GWD-28-19，来把，说出你的看法 [打印本页]
作者: v22    时间: 2005-9-10 17:10
标题: GWD-28-19，来把，说出你的看法

28-19: Plankton generally thrive in areas of the ocean with sufficient concentrations of certain nitrogen compounds near the surface where plankton live. Nevertheless, some areas, though rich in these nitrogen compounds, have few plankton. These areas have particularly low concentrations of iron, and oceanographers hypothesize that this shortage of iron prevents plankton from thriving. However, an experimental release of iron compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population, even though local iron concentrations increased immediately.


Which of the following, if true, argues most strongly against concluding, on the basis of the information above, that the oceanographers’ hypothesis is false?


A: Not all of the nitrogen compounds that are sometimes found in relatively high concentrations in the oceans are nutrients for plankton.


B: Certain areas of the ocean support an abundance of plankton despite having particularly low concentrations of iron.


C: The release of the iron compounds did not increase the supply of nitrogen compounds in the area.


D: A few days after the iron compounds were released, ocean currents displaced the iron-rich water from the surface.


E: The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean where plankton thrive.


C


偶选了C，很多人选了D。


题目是要辩驳 oceanographers’ hypothesis 是错的，没根据的/


而oceanographers’ hypothesis 是shortage of iron prevents plankton from thriving。而结论有说an experimental release of iron compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population, even though local iron concentrations increased immediately.，即有丰富的铁加了进去，但是并无增加P的量。



偶反而觉得D是加强，D说 few days after the iron compounds were released, ocean currents displaced the iron-rich water from the surface一些天后，海洋的某些物质取代了铁。那就是说铁就少了，缺铁了，而正好说明了结论P的量没有增加是因为铁少了，从而证明了oceanographers’ hypothesis 。



而C说了，增加铁的同时，nitrogen 是缺少的，那么说因为铁的减少导致P的量少就不得而知道。


而B只是说了Certain areas ，只是针对个别例子，就象作文AA那样，这样是不具有说服力的，是不是？/


大家快来讨论啊啊！！！

作者: v22    时间: 2005-9-11 22:24
ing？顶
作者: paveway    时间: 2005-9-11 22:59

如果题目没有错：argues ...against concluding, ...that the oceanographers’ hypothesis is false


" 反对结论—海洋学家的观点是错误的”，是不是就是支持海洋学家的观点-缺少铁，plankton 才不能茂盛呢？


D正好是加强


题目是个双重否定，如果我没错的话

作者: lawyer_1    时间: 2005-9-12 06:15

海洋学家的假设：缺铁是阻止P茂盛的因素。


反对者:缺铁不是阻止P茂盛的因素。理由是铁加进去啦，一样不茂盛


问题：WEAKEN反对者。


D说：加进去的铁给海浪赶走啦。即反对者的理由不成立。


C错在原文没有这样的关系：铁的作用要通过增加N的供应才能对Plankton起作用。也许是单独作用。

作者: v22    时间: 2005-9-12 12:51

哇，谢谢啊！！


真明了，原来我把题目问题给想反了~~~~~~！！

作者: hedge    时间: 2006-12-9 15:03

E is correct. 因为根据E,

The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean where plankton thrive.

这说明什么? 这说明了the iron compounds是那种生物的排泄物．这就能解释了 an experimental release of iron compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population．

图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看

The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean where plankton thrive.

这说明什么? 这说明了the iron compounds是那种生物的排泄物．这就能解释了 an experimental release of iron compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population．

图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看

The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean where plankton thrive.

这说明什么? 这说明了the iron compounds是那种生物的排泄物．这就能解释了 an experimental release of iron compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population．

图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看

The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean where plankton thrive.

这说明什么? 这说明了the iron compounds是那种生物的排泄物这就能解释了 an experimental release of iron compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population．

图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看图片点击可在新窗口打开查看

而那些笨蛋科学家还 hypothesize that this shortage of iron prevents plankton from thriving．很显然，这是AB共存，所以A导致B的题型．最直接的削弱是B导致A，　而不是A导致B

作者: lazyratcn    时间: 2006-12-9 19:42

这说明什么? 这说明了the iron compounds是那种生物的排泄物．这就能解释了

这属于自我推理吧，

个人觉得这是个PARADOX题目，有两个现象，一个论点，两个现象矛盾，问为什么？

D正确，有其他原因导致两个现象矛盾

作者: hedge    时间: 2006-12-9 23:11
以下是引用lazyratcn在2006-12-9 19:42:00的发言：

这说明什么? 这说明了the iron compounds是那种生物的排泄物．这就能解释了

这属于自我推理吧，

排泄物的说法只是开玩笑，但确实很显然，这是“AB共存，所以A导致B”的题型．最直接的削弱是B导致A，　而不是A导致B

如果E情况存在，The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean where plankton thrive.的话，将不能说明是铁化合物导致plankton繁荣，还是plankton多了导致铁化合物增多。自然也就削弱了科学家的结论。

作者: lazyratcn    时间: 2006-12-9 23:32

Nevertheless, some areas, though rich in these nitrogen comNevertheless, some areas, though rich in these nitrogen compounds, have few plankton. These areas have particularly low concentrations of ironpounds, have few plankton. These areas have particularly low concentrations of iron

仔细看下这句话，如果是iron是P搞出来的，只有N决定P的话，为啥N多的地方P会少呢？

作者: hedge    时间: 2006-12-10 10:03
因为iron不只是P搞出来的,不能排除其他生物也搞出来的可能
作者: heshaohua666    时间: 2006-12-12 23:00

这说明了the iron compounds是那种生物的排泄物

不会是笨蛋科学家拉的吧

作者: heshaohua666    时间: 2006-12-12 23:02

这个太搞了，联想超级丰富！谢谢你，笑了我半个小时！

作者: hedge    时间: 2006-12-13 12:31

开了玩笑后，再看：

生物P与铁共同大量出现，有些地方很多铁却没有P.科学家说铁少P就不繁殖。实验中注入铁，同样没有P

 

找削弱科学家观点的选项

 

E.   P繁荣的地方自然而然地铁就多了（基本上就是先有P再有铁的意思，而不是科学家“铁少P就不繁殖”的观点。估计这个就是排泄，否则无法解释这一GMAT逻辑）


[此贴子已经被作者于2006-12-13 12:32:28编辑过]
作者: boochxu    时间: 2007-1-18 08:26

Fact 1: Plankton thrive in areas with nitrogen.

Fact 2: Few plankton thrive in areas with nitrogen, but with low iron

Fact 3( of the experiment): release of iron, but plankton do not thrive at the same time

oceanographers推理链:
            Shortage of iron
            ðð Plankton not thrive.

D选项推理过程：Ocean currents washed the ironà shortage of ironà Plankton are not thrive

  问题相当于支持oceanographers,D为答案.

作者: tonyyuan    时间: 2007-2-21 00:20
Lawyer的解释很好呀！赞！
作者: vivian_chi    时间: 2007-11-14 17:53
HEDGE解释的非常清楚，刚开始看这题就一直绕在iron和ni的关系上。后来一再看题，才发现非常鬼的gmac在问题上也作了手脚，实际上题目是要支持海洋学家的观点，因此只要建立iron和plankton的关系就可以了。相当恶心的题目啊~~
作者: JimmyYeh    时间: 2009-3-3 14:15

Plankton generally thrive in areas of the ocean with sufficient concentrations of certain nitrogen compounds near the surface, where plankton live.  Nevertheless, some areas, though rich in these nitrogen compounds, have few plankton.  These areas have particularly low concentrations of iron, and oceanographers hypothesize that this shortage of iron prevents plankton from thriving.  However, an experimental release of iron compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population, even though local iron concentrations increased immediately.

Which of the following, if true, argues most strongly against concluding, on the basis of the information above, that the oceanographers’ hypothesis is false?

重點是要看懂再問啥，橘色部分為concluding, 橘色部分是說，實驗顯示灑鐵下去，鐵含量馬上增加，但是海藻還是不會生長，等於是反駁oceanographers，因為oceanographers認為是缺鐵會防止海藻生長。
        題目是問argues most strongly against concluding，所以等於是要支持oceanographers。

簡單的說，題目出現舉例或者做實驗，就必須馬上想到實驗與真實情況會否相同？

這題就算看不懂，看到做實驗，也理當猜Ｄ。表示真實海洋的情況與實驗不同，真實海洋會把鐵沖散。所以間接支持oceanographers。
            Correct!





欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) Powered by Discuz! X3.3