ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

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?

正确答案: B

相关帖子

更多...

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4716

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 3467|回复: 0
打印 上一主题 下一主题

GWD一小题,求解谢谢

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2011-8-1 21:34:26 | 显示全部楼层
首先结论是environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded,也就是说
Merrick population 不会减少, 作者的论据是 the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since“ five years ago”, 而B说Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are “ten years old”,
也就是说chemical spill occurred 之后五年来下蛋的乌龟出生在chemical spill occurred 之前,其数量的增多不能说明environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-9-7 08:57
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部