以下是引用小I爱漂漂在2004-12-18 9:24:00的发言：FeiFei-73
73. There is no reason why the work of scientists has to be officially confirmed before being published. There is a system in place for the confirmation or disconfirmation of scientific findings, namely, the replication of results by other scientists. Poor scientific work on the part of any one scientists, which can include anything from careless reporting practices to fraud, is not harmful. It will be exposed and rendered harmless when other scientists conduct experiments and obtain disconfirmatory results. Which one of the following, if true, would weaken the argument? (A) Scientific experiments can go unchallenged for many years before they are replicated. (B) Most scientists work in universities, where their work is submitted to peer review before publication. (C) Most scientists are under pressure to make their work accessible to the scrutiny of replication. (D) In scientific experiments, careless reporting is more common than fraud. (E) Most scientists work as part of a team rather than alone. 这个题不是太明白后面两句话和前面的联系的意思,所以也搞不明白为什么要选A??请指教! 题目文本的用意在于反对现行于科学界的论文发表审查制度，认为没有必要通过制度化的方式来防止作弊和内容性错误，原文认为基于科学研究的特性，发表出来的科研结果如果是错的，那只要有人按照论文重复一下研究过程，那么真伪自然明了。 所以答案选A是比较清楚的。
[此贴子已经被作者于2008-8-2 2:57:00编辑过] | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2008-4-29 17:12:00
