标题: GWD30-Q32:还是不懂。。。 [打印本页] 作者: 笨蛋加油 时间: 2012-4-11 19:25 标题: GWD30-Q32:还是不懂。。。 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?
A. 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. B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old. C. 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. D. 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. E. 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.
正确答案：B 我还是觉得D好 我觉得D既可以起到削弱的作用，又说明了题目中这句话Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago.，非常完美 然而A倒是也可以削弱结论，但无法解释Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago这句话。 所以我还是觉得D好。。。
不知道大家怎么看？作者: naoyixue 时间: 2012-4-11 20:54
首先，i can do so. 哈哈， it 没有指代。玩笑 d的话就说了吃龟的鸟少了，可能是一个上来孵蛋的龟龟多的原因，但是不能结合文章中的5年来说明，5年前的化学泄露的影响。而b说了，因为要10岁才能搞蛋，那么旁敲侧击的说了，那些上来搞蛋的龟龟是10岁，从一个方面的定义上来说不是5年前的那个龟龟，其实是2个龟龟。所以这个龟龟的多不能说明化学泄露没有影响，完全反驳观点。