|
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.
好象想明白了
反对者的证据是:来下蛋的海龟增加了,说明化学物质溢出没影响
而B是指出了反对者引用的证据是无效的,因为那一批来下蛋的10年孵出的海龟,根本没有受到化学物质溢出的影响,怎么可以用来证明结论呢 夸张的比喻:2007年发生的事,你用发生在唐朝的事来证明,这样很荒谬哦~~~ 再补一句,逻辑题中表时间概念的信息还是蛮重要的,经常是出题点
[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-30 19:25:40编辑过] | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2006-8-18 01:58:00
