For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito have been damaged by exhaust from the many tour buses that come to the city. There has been little parking space, so most buses have idled at the curb during each stop on their tour, and idling produces as much exhaust as driving. The city has now provided parking that accommodates a third of the tour buses, so damage to Palitito's buildings from the buses' exhaust will diminish significantly. Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument?
(A) The exhaust from Palitito's few automobiles is not a significant threat to Palitito's buildings. (B) Palitito's Renaissance buildings are not threatened by pollution other than engine exhaust. (C) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another. (D) More tourists come to Palitito by tour bus than by any other single means of transportation. (E) Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visiting a site.
正确选项是C，我选的是B。我能理解C为什么是对的。但是请问B怎么理解？ 我看题目时，关注到damage to Palitito's buildings from the buses' exhaust将会大大减少，然后想的就是如果这一措施实行了，但是主要damage的除了观光车之外还有别的，所以看到B我就毫不犹豫的选了……我理解的B是P建筑物除了废气不会受到其他污染。 请求高人指点啊~~作者: littlexian 时间: 2011-4-1 17:58
We need a point, as C, which can support the argument "damage to Palitito's buildings from the buses' exhaust will diminish significantly". In other words, we need a explaination about why more paking lot would cause less buses' exhaust pollution.
B. just mentions the only threaten is from the buses' exhaust. It has nothing relates to the new parking lot solution. It does not support the argument.