ChaseDream

标题: GWD-30-Q32 求助 [打印本页]

作者: vivian_huang 时间: 2007-9-21 20:25
标题: GWD-30-Q32 求助

1. GWD-30-Q32

A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?

The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old.
Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea turtles survive in the ocean until adulthood and return to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach.
Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs. ==> 说明Environment pressures （虽然和化学泄露无关）导致了几种捕食merrick sea turtle的蛋的海鸟的数量的急剧下降，这个不能用于说明问题吗？
After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.

B 原文大概是在说"5年前chemical spill 污染了海归下蛋的地方.可是这5年里海归来这产蛋的数量在增加.说明

chemical spill 污染没造成很大的影响".

反对B:就是想在说"那些回来的海归可能不知道下蛋的地方被chemical spill 污染, 不是因为它们知到了还回来下".十年回来一次就是说过去5年里回来的海归都不知到这里被chemical spill 污染过.

作者: leglas117 时间: 2009-8-4 22:30
up

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)