ChaseDream

标题: GWD-30-Q32 [打印本页]

作者: frankman 时间: 2009-6-8 20:26
标题: 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.
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.

答案选B，请问下NN为什么不选C而选B？谢谢指点！

作者: pc123 时间: 2009-6-8 21:29

非牛牛

The foundation of conclution that the environmentalists were wrong about Merrick populaiton is that there are more female turtles come to the beach to lay eggs.

Answer choice B provides a reason that these turtle are 10-year-old, which means that they have not been affected by the chemical spill. This assertion introduces another explaination to the phonomena observed at the beach.

Answer choice C just means that under this abnormal condition---chemical spill, more turtals survived in the sea. This assertion in fact strengthens the argument in refutation of the environmetalists' prediction.

[

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-6-8 21:29:11编辑过]

作者: frankman 时间: 2009-6-9 20:25

我读题不仔细，题目要求的是对环境学家预测的批驳的削弱，而非环境学家的预测。

谢谢PC123

作者: leglas117 时间: 2009-8-4 22:29
up

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