标题: 转战逻辑区了诶。。求问OG91题，A选项怎么就无关了呢？不是在原文中有提到么？ [打印本页] 作者: yippewanner 时间: 2013-2-24 15:22 标题: 转战逻辑区了诶。。求问OG91题，A选项怎么就无关了呢？不是在原文中有提到么？ 91. Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game Authority would have the public believe that increases in the number of marine fish caught demonstrate that this resource is no longer endangered. This is a specious argument, as unsound as it would be to assert that the ever-increasing rate at which rain forests are being cut down demonstrates a lack of danger to that resource. The real cause of the increased fish-catch is a greater efficiency in using technologies that deplete resources. The environmentalist’s statements, if true, best support which of the following as a conclusion? (A) The use of technology is the reason for the increasing encroachment of people on nature. (B) It is possible to determine how many fish are in the sea in some way other than by catching fish. (C) The proportion of marine fish that are caught is as high as the proportion of rain forest trees that are cut down each year. (D) Modern technologies waste resources by catching inedible fish. (E) Marine fish continue to be an endangered resource.作者: frankiepn 时间: 2013-2-24 23:53
文章主要是说 increased fish-catch的原因是a greater efficiency in using technologies而非 The commissioner所认为的 this resource is no longer endangered. environmentalist的主要目的是说明this resource is still endangered,而非讨论The use of technology，另外a项感觉只是复述了原文最后一句
我也才刚复习逻辑没多久。。。。不知道思路对不对。。。。。。。仅作参考。。。。。。作者: lifeforest 时间: 2013-2-26 08:25
刚刚看过这题，OG的解释说不能单单因为这一个例子是由于技术的原因导致了捕鱼量增加，就说in general的，The use of technology is the reason ，也许还有很多其他的原因。楼上说的对，这段话的主要意识是想反驳this resource is no longer endangered，所以选E