摸考遇到的BF题

laihong

Astronomer: observations of the shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter show that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere in1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragment’s size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments’ entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer spaces if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.>>

A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.>>

B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.>>

C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.>>

D. The first provides evidences in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.>>

E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

lykuang02

C

laihong

不是C

yangxiaogang

应该选D,The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur,提供了作者判断碎块大小的一个客观事实，it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.是作者的结论。

欢迎指教

laihong

答案给的是E, 我对第一句想不通

深秋的马蹄莲

对于D答案,我觉得第一句表述的意思不足够来充当evidence,作者说的是The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur,"almost"几乎,几乎可以确定碎片没有包括sulfur,表明这个判断并没有经过严格的论证,并不一定绝对会成立,只是一种判断而已,因此是不能理解为它就是后面结论的一个evidence的.

piaony

我觉得答案是D。

The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur

说的是事实。

ringking

ding

D 和E之间的争议是：D是否是evidence。支持D，NN请指教！

cloudymind

The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur

Is it an evidence or a judgement?

An evidence: Specific facts offered to support a theory or premise

A judgement: An opinion drawn from a consideration of facts or evidence

Now consider another situation in which your friend and you are inside a room without windows. Your friend asked you, "is it rainning outside?".

If you've already been to outside, you would answer "yes it is rainning." ---- this states a fact based on direct evidence (you saw the rain).

If you haven't been outside but you read the forecast or hear the thunders, you would answer " yes it most certainly is rainning" -- this states a judgement based on your knowledge of indirect evidences. It COULD be wrong in some extreme cases.

Bottomline, you don't say " almost certainly" if it's an evidence, only when it's a judgement. (E)

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-12-13 10:28:29编辑过]

HORRY

可以问一下吗 BF是指什么题  BOLDFACE???是什么意思的 ??没碰过啊