天山9-32

爱睡觉的猫

是一道BOLD题 偶不会帖PFD文件. 谁能帮帮忙

爱睡觉的猫

up

yangjh1111

T-9-Q32.
            

Ecologists: the Scottish Highlands were once the site of extensive forests, but these forests have mostly disappeared and been replaced by peat bogs. The common view is that the Highland’s deforestation was caused by human activity, especially agriculture. However, agriculture began in the Highlands less than 2,000 years ago. Peat bogs, which consist of compressed decayed vegetable matter, build up by only about one foot per 1000 years, and, throughout the Highlands, remains of trees in peat bogs are almost all at depth great than four feet. Since climate changes that occurred between 7,000 years and 4,000 years ago favored the development of peat bogs rather than the survival of forests, the deforestation was more likely the result of natural processes than of human activity.

 

In the ecologist’s argument, the two portions in boldfaces play which of the following roles?

 

1. The first is evidence that has been used in support of a position that the argument rejects; the second is a finding that the ecologist uses to counter the evidence.

2. The first is evidence that, in light of the evidence provided in the second, serves as grounds for the ecologist’s rejection of a certain position

3. The first is a position that the ecologist rejects; the second is evidence that has been used in support of that position.

4. The first is a position that the ecologist rejects; the second provides evidence in support of that rejection.

5. The first is a position for which the ecologist argues; the second provides evidence to support that position.

 

SPARTAN_117

两句BF都是具体数据，因此都是evidence，先排除position选项CDE。
再看两句的关系，两者相结合才能得出ecologist的观点——与人类活动无关。两句相辅相成，缺一不可，所以第二句在论述中不是被用来反对第一句的，排除A。

最后看一眼B确认一下: 第一句在第二句衬托之下为ecologist的观点（同时也是对另一种观点的反对）提供了后盾——正确。

liubin1987

同意LS的说法,两句都是evidence,并没有出现结论性的东西,所以"杀"掉C,D,E .

 而剩下在A,B中比较时,只要看下A后半句的the second is a finding that the ecologist uses to counter the evidence

就明显要排除A了