[讨论][求助]绿皮书328题大全中找不到帮忙啊～～

chenyudie · 发表于 2006-7-10 12:14:00

328. A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker's Beach, the world's sole nesting ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching . Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker's Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists' prediction that the world 's Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven un founded.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in refutation of the environmentalists' prediction?

A. The chemical spill five years ago occured at a time when there were neither Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker's Beach.

B. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker's Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old.

C.Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatching female Merrick sea turtles survive in the ocean until adulthood and return to lay their eggs at Baker's Beach.

D.Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs.

E. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker's Beach to nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.

XDF书上给的答案是B，我选的是D，哪位NN来解释一下啊？

pumpkin · 发表于 2006-7-12 08:15:00

你为啥选D？

chenyudie · 发表于 2006-7-12 15:37:00

我觉得D是给出他因削弱。

不知道B是怎样的，能解释一下么～～～

kallyli · 发表于 2006-7-12 16:50:00

"and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching" means that the hatch-inhibition has already happen even if they are transfered to another place.

the subject asks us to weaken the refutation of the environmentalists' prediction that the population would decline as a result of the spill is not true. The fact that the increase number of female Merricks returning to lay can not prove that the spill will not effect the population if ten years later, since the spill of chemical, the return of female Merricks disappeared. 'cause from the answer B we know that the return female five years later are the Merricks before the accident.

chenyudie · 发表于 2006-7-13 10:29:00

多谢～～

发现问题是削弱对环保主义者推论的反驳～

不好意思，问题没看清～～晕～

Idontcare4u · 发表于 2012-5-10 16:29:35

同题变体，黑脸题
32. GWD30-Q32:
A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching. Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago. Clearly, environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?

The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old.
Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea turtles survive in the ocean until adulthood and return to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach.
Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs.
After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.

本贴相关题目 TN-20-CR-32 (ALBU)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

[讨论][求助]绿皮书328题大全中找不到帮忙啊～～