- UID
- 586161
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2010-11-28
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
8#
楼主 |
发表于 2011-5-11 20:50:23
|
只看该作者
我找到反例啦,就是削弱题型也不允许违背前提 9. (24749-!-item-!-188;#058&001426)
Scientists are discussing ways to remove excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by increasing the amount that is absorbed by plant life. One plan to accomplish this is to establish giant floating seaweed farms in the oceans. When the seaweed plants die, they will be disposed of by being burned for fuel.
通过增加吸收二氧化碳的植物来减少空气中的二氧化碳。有一种方法是种植海藻,等海藻死了可以燃烧作燃料。 文章推理:海藻可以减少二氧化碳 Which of the following, if true, would indicate the most serious weakness in the plan above?
(A) Some areas of ocean in the Southern Hemisphere do not contain sufficient nutrients to support large seaweed farms. 反对前提,前提已经说了可以种植。 (B) When a seaweed plant is burned, it releases an amount of carbon dioxide comparable to the amount it has absorbed in its lifetime. 他因反对结论,虽然海藻可以吸收二氧化碳,但是它燃烧得时候二氧化碳又释放出来了 (C) Even if seaweed farms prove effective, some people will be reluctant to switch to this new fuel. 和结论是否减少空气中的二氧化碳无关 (D) Each year about seven billion tons of carbon dioxide are released into the atmosphere but only about five billion tons are absorbed by plant life. 只是在描述一个事实,和海藻计划无关,虽然没有完全消除,但也说明海藻计划是可以减轻含量的 (E) Seaweed farms would make more money by farming seaweed to sell as nutritional supplements than by farming seaweed to sell as fuel. 和海藻用途无关,并没有提到关键词二氧化碳 |
|