Critic: Some historians claim that the people who built this ring of stones thousands of years ago in England were knowledgeable about celestial events. This is not the case. The historians base their claim on the fact that two of the stones in the ring form a line pointing directly to the position of the sun at sunrise at the spring equinox. However, there are so many stones in the ring that the chance of at least one pair pointing in a celestially significant direction is high. The critic’s conclusion is questionable because A. The undermining of evidence supporting a statement is taken as proof that the statement is false. B. It logically contradicts some of the evidence presented in support of it. C. Statements that absolutely establish the historians’ claim are treated as if they merely give inconclusive support to that claim. D. Something that is merely a matter of opinion is treated as if it were subject to verification as a fact. E. The critic is neither a scientist nor a historian.
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-11-20 21:29:15
收藏
收藏
楼主