ChaseDream
搜索
12下一页
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

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?

正确答案: B

相关帖子

更多...

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 8973|回复: 17
打印 上一主题 下一主题

GWD-30-Q32

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2006-6-2 10:52:00 | 只看该作者

GWD-30-Q32

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?

A.         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.

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 hatchling 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.

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.

答案B怎么理解?

沙发
发表于 2006-6-2 12:48:00 | 只看该作者

原文大概是在说"5年前chemical spill 污染了海归下蛋的地方.可是这5年里海归来这产蛋的数量在增加.说明

chemical spill 污染没造成很大的影响".

反对B:就是想在说"那些回来的海归可能不知道下蛋的地方被chemical spill 污染, 不是因为它们知到了还回来下".十年回来一次就是说过去5年里回来的海归都不知到这里被chemical spill 污染过.

板凳
发表于 2006-6-3 13:21:00 | 只看该作者
what's wrong with C? does B require too much gratuitous assumption?
地板
发表于 2006-6-3 15:28:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用rosmarine在2006-6-3 13:21:00的发言:
what's wrong with C? does B require too much gratuitous assumption?

原文是要反对"oil spill没有对海归产生effect". C所说的"海归的存活下来的很少",这是不能反对原文的.是没关项.

mm能说说你选C的推理过程吗?


[此贴子已经被作者于2006-6-3 15:28:42编辑过]
5#
发表于 2006-6-3 15:42:00 | 只看该作者
现在我知道了B是对的,因为海龟要10年才到达产卵的年龄,chemical spill是5年前发生的,所以还要5年才能看出海龟population少了,现在还看不出来(现在看到的产卵的海龟都是早几年出生的)。所以environmentalists的预测是正确的。

我原本就是倾向于B,只是看着C觉得跟B有点像,说不出错在哪里,呵呵。
6#
 楼主| 发表于 2006-6-4 07:37:00 | 只看该作者

thanks!

7#
发表于 2006-6-22 23:48:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用rosmarine在2006-6-3 15:42:00的发言:
现在我知道了B是对的,因为海龟要10年才到达产卵的年龄,chemical spill是5年前发生的,所以还要5年才能看出海龟population少了,现在还看不出来(现在看到的产卵的海龟都是早几年出生的)。所以environmentalists的预测是正确的。

我原本就是倾向于B,只是看着C觉得跟B有点像,说不出错在哪里,呵呵。

说得很好啊,呵呵,终于懂了.像这种出现时间的题目总是需要特别注意时间的.呵呵

8#
发表于 2006-6-25 13:20:00 | 只看该作者

我懷疑B是否正確答案。因為D很象ETS的偏愛﹕他因。

D是說其它的原因導致捕食海龜蛋的一種海鳥數量大量減少。這種減少會導致海龜蛋的增多。從一方面也解釋了為什麼5年來下蛋的海龜會增多。

B暗示說10年後才會有影響。但是並沒有解釋為什麼海龜會多。

9#
发表于 2006-6-25 13:24:00 | 只看该作者

不好意思﹐想歪了。B是答案. 每套題總是要錯 6﹐7道﹐感覺是到了平臺期﹐真是鬱悶。

文中提到了海龜的蛋由于oil spilling,幾乎都不可孵化。這是作為事實提出的。所以即使鳥少吃了﹐多剩的蛋也不可能孵出來。


[此贴子已经被作者于2006-6-25 13:36:03编辑过]
10#
发表于 2006-8-7 08:31:00 | 只看该作者

如何排除a?

5年前化学泄漏发生在海滩上没有海龟也没有海龟蛋的时候.


[此贴子已经被作者于2006-8-7 8:33:05编辑过]
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-12-27 00:41
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部