- UID
- 1143124
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2015-8-10
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
4. Editorial: The roof of Northtown’s municipal equipment-storage building collapsed
under the weight of last week’s heavy snowfall. The building was constructed
recently and met local building-safety codes in every particular, except that the
nails used for attaching roof supports to the building’s columns were of a smaller
size than the codes specify for this purpose. Clearly, this collapse exemplifies how
even a single, apparently insignificant departure from safety standards can have
severe consequences.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the editorial’s argument?
(A) The only other buildings to suffer roof collapses from the weight of the
snowfall were older buildings constructed according to less exacting
standards than those in the codes.
(B) The amount of snow that accumulated on the roof of the equipmentstorage
building was greater than the predicted maximum that was used in
drawing up the safety codes.
(C) Because the equipment-storage building was not intended for human
occupation, some safety-code provisions that would have applied to an office
building did not apply to it.
(D) The municipality of Northtown itself has the responsibility for ensuring
that buildings constructed within its boundaries meet the provisions of the
building-safety codes.
(E) Because the equipment-storage building was used for storing snowremoval
equipment, the building was almost completely empty when the roof collapsed.
OA:B
如何解释C?他因:equipment-storage building的标准本身就比office building低,并不是nail的错。
|
|