求助一题

米可可

11.   “If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction,” said the biologist.

“So all that is needed to save the koala is to stop deforestation,” said the politician.

Which one of the following statements is consistent with the biologist’s claim but not with the politician’s claim?

(A) Deforestation continues and the koala becomes extinct.

(B) Deforestation is stopped and the koala becomes extinct.

(C) Reforestation begins and the koala survives.

(D) Deforestation is slowed and the koala survives.

(E) Deforestation is slowed and the koala approaches extinction.

Why answer B rather than A?

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-9-17 17:34:54编辑过]

gonghao

here is a tricky means for you to chose

biologist:  koala will approach extinction

politician:deforestation is needed to be stopped(that means deforestation is continuing)

the question ask us to find the answer that consistent with the biologist’s claim but not with the politician’s claim?

consistent with the biologist’s claim: koala will approach extinction=koala becomes extinct

not with the politician’s claim:  deforestation is not continuing=  deforestation is stopped

So the answer is B rather than A.

米可可

Thanks