ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.

In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

正确答案: E

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 1639|回复: 3
打印 上一主题 下一主题

摸考遇到的BF题

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2005-10-25 14:01:00 | 只看该作者

摸考遇到的BF题

Astronomer: observations of the shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter show that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere in1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragment’s size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments’ entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer spaces if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.


A.     The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.


B.     The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.


C.     The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.


D.     The first provides evidences in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.


E.      The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.


等会儿给答案

沙发
发表于 2005-10-26 00:12:00 | 只看该作者

I think E is the best.   This is obvious that 1 was presumed to draw a conclusion in 2.

板凳
发表于 2005-12-26 22:04:00 | 只看该作者
e
地板
发表于 2005-12-26 22:13:00 | 只看该作者

D.


the first sentence is not a judgement, but rather a sort of evidence.


my two cents.

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, 2024-11-23 19:02
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部