15. (26883-!-item-!-188;#058&002985) [GWD #29-Q28]
Astronomer: Observations of theShoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the cometbroke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they didnot show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomersstudied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented tracesof sulfur after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almostcertainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloudlayer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outeratmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likelythat some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed throughJupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, thetwo portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first presents acircumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is partof that explanation.
(B) The first acknowledges aconsideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second isthat conclusion.
(C) The first acknowledges aconsideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the secondprovides evidence in support of that conclusion.
(D) The first provides evidence insupport of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges aconsideration that weighs against that conclusion.
(E) The first is a judgmentadvanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is thatconclusion.
我的问题是，第二个黑体怎么就是conclusion？ 他不是对第一个的解释吗？！
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-6-9 15:45:26
收藏
收藏
楼主
