Although fullerenes--spherical molecules made entirely of carbon--were first found in the laboratory, they have since been found in nature, formed in fissures of the rare mineral shungite. Since laboratory synthesis of fullerenes requires distinctive conditions of temperature and pressure, this discovery should give geologists a test case for evaluating hypotheses about the state of the Earth's crust at the time these naturally occurring fullerenes were formed.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument?
(A) Confirming that the shungite genuinely contained fullerenes took careful experimentation.
(B) Some fullerenes have also been found on the remains of a small meteorite that collided with a spacecraft.
(C) The mineral shungite itself contains large amounts of carbon, from which the fullerenes apparently formed.
(D) The naturally occurring fullerenes are arranged in a previously unknown crystalline structure.
(E) Shungite itself is formed only under distinctive conditions.
我通过shungite这个词，排除掉了ACE 然后在BD中选， 我选了B 认为是他因削弱。
可是答案是D 似乎我把文章的题目理解错了...
还是不明白您的解释
继承了以前的未知结构又能怎么样呢？这样的话，不可以去研究了么？我认为这是一种加强了。
而B 是一种巧合的事件，这个不能作为研究的对象啊，会产生误导啊
题干结论， this discovery should give geologists a test case for evaluating hypotheses about the state of the Earth's crust at the time these naturally occurring fullerenes were formed
意味实验室的发现可以作为范例为地质学家提供F如何生成的参考
D，实际中F生成的原因非常多样化。-->weaken了结论
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |