不知道为什么离OG思路越来越远了，请NN们帮忙

做了几套GWD回头再来做OG的诊断性测试为什么反而觉得和OG的思路越来越远了…下面贴了几道我做错的题，想请NN帮忙分析一下我的思路到底不对再什么地方？

32. For years the beautiful Renaissance building in Palitito have been damaged by exhaust hrom the many tour buses that come to the city. There has been little parking space, so most buses have idled at the curb during each stop on their tour, and idling produces as much exhaust as driving. The city has now provided parking that accommodates the third of the tour buses, so damage to Palitito’s building from the buses’ exhaust will diminish significantly.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly support the argument?

A.      the exhaust from Palitito’s few automobiles is not a significant threat to Palitito’s building.

B.      Palitito’s Renaissance buildings are not threatened by pollution other than engine exhaust.

C.      Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transportation.

D.     More tourists come to Palitito by tour bus than by any other single means of transportation.

E.      Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visiting a site.

这道题答案是C，我选了D；原文说公交尾气破坏当地的建筑，现在新建了停车场，尾气的破坏程度大大减少；我的做题思路是：A 说的exhaust of automobile, 而原文说的是exhaust of bus，所以是无关选项；C说的是tour bus spend time，也是无关选项；E说的是some of the bus对文章起不到支持或削弱的作用；最后再B和D之间徘徊，D说大多数人是乘公交来的，那么公交带来的危害也应该比其他交通工具带来的危害大，那么建立停车场减少了公交尾气的排放，那么对建筑物的危害也就能最大程度的减少了，所以是支持；B说尾气排放是唯一的威胁，但是好像不管尾气排放是不是唯一，减少了尾气排放都能减少危害；所以最后 D；

但是看了OG的解释，对自己的分析很无语…

下面是OG的分析：

A.      if automobile exhaust is not a threat, the argument is not affected.

B.      This statement dome not address the question of whether the new parking will reduce the damage carried by engine exhaust from the buses.

C.      Correct. This statement properly cites a factor that supports that argument: since most of the buses time has been spent producing damaging exhaust, the new parking should reduce the damage significantly

D.     This statement about tourists’ chosen means of transportation is irrelevant to the issue of what the buses do while in the city

E.      It is given that the new parking will only provide space for a third of the buses, and thus some buses will continue to idle and some to drive around, continuing to contribute equally to the building damage. This statement does not strengthen the argument.

不是很理解OG关于CDE的分析，我做题的时候把CE很快就排除了，没有到CE里有这么多含义….

还有一题

A year ago, Dietz Food launched a yearlong advertising campaign for its canned tuna. Last year, Dietz sold 12 million cans of customers brought in by the campaign. Profits form the additional sales, however, were substantially less than the cost of the advertising campaign. Clearly, therefore, campaign did nothing to further Dietz food economic interests.

A. Sales of canned tuna account for a relatively small percentage of Dietz Food’s profit.

B. Most of the people who bought Diefdtz’s canned tuna for the first time as a result of the campaign were already loyal customers of other Dietz products.

C. A less expensive advertising campaign would brought in significantly fewer new customers for Dietz’s canned tuna did the campaign Dietz’s launched last year.

D. Dietz made money on sales of canned tuna last year.

E. In each of the past five years, there was a steep. Industry-wide declines in sales of canned tuna.

这道题我选的是C；答案是E; 原文说 advertising campaign 使 canned tuna的销量上升，但是其他商品的销量却低于广告的成本，结论是广告宣传没有带来经济利益；我迅速排除了ABD，然后再EC里面徘徊，感觉两个好像都可以，最后糊里糊涂地选了C；Og对C的解释是 This information neither strengthen nor weaken the argument.这样我很不理解，C说便宜一点的广告宣传大大减少购买canned tuna的新顾客，也就是说去年广告宣传带来了比较多的新顾客，那不就带来经济利益了吗？

求救啊~~`没有人理我吗？