[求助] 一道蓝皮上的真题！

Isabel221

Plankton generally thrive in areas of the ocean with sufficient concentration of certain nitrogen compounds near the surface, where plankton live. Nevertheless, some areas, though rich in these nitrogen compounds, have few plankon. These areas have partucularly low concentration of iron, and oceanographers hypothesize that this shortage of iron prevents plankton from thriving. However, an experimental release of iron compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankon population, even though local iron cocentrations  increased immeduately.

which of the following, if ture, argues most strongly against concluding, on the basis of the information above, that the oceanographers' hypothesis is false?

A. Not all of the nitrogen compounds that are sometimes found in relatively high concentrations in the oceans are nutrients for plankton.

B. Certain areas of the ocean support an abundance of the plankton despite having particularly low concentration of iron.

C.The release of the iron compounds did not increase the supply of nitrogen compounds in the area.

D. A few days after the iron compounds were released, ocean currents displaced the iron-rich water from the surface.

E. The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in area of the ocean where plankton thrive.

正确答案是D。我选的是B

根据这道题的问法，到底是要削弱什么呢？是“海洋学者的结论” 还是 “海洋学者的结论错误”？

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-7 14:43:45编辑过]

Drakedirect

题中说在缺少铁的地区，plankon的数量少，因而oceanographers 的出结论说缺少铁是原因。要找个选项削弱其结论。
D ocean currents可以把人工注入的铁混合物送到水的表面（plankon居住的地方），结合文章中所说即便这样，plankon的数目还是没有增加，说明缺少铁元素不是plankon数量少得原因。所以为削弱。
B选项，我个人认为是无关选项。文章中研究的对象是缺少铁元素同时也缺少plankon的地区。而某些区域（含有大量的plankon同时也缺少铁元素）对文章的推理构不成任何的影响，所以不能起到削弱作用。
欢迎讨论

Isabel221

 ocean currents displaced the iron-rich water from the surface

应该怎么理解啊？ 是把铁送到水表面，还是把铁从水表面移走？

lolita0320

这道题要做对关键就是要把你用紫色标注的那个句子看懂~我做的时候也是没有把那句话理解到。他是要你选则一个选项来证明那个hypothesis是正确的。所有当然选D，说明实验失败是其他原因导致的。

doudoulovely

同意楼上的

Drakedirect

sorry, 看错题目了，支持楼上的mm，永远站在正义mm的一边，哈哈！！

弥小岛

顶顶 有人能再讨论下吗

Sunsunshine

弥小岛 发表于 2016-7-20 03:12
顶顶 有人能再讨论下吗

看我的帖子有没有回复的时候刷到了这个帖子~就来分析一下~希望可以帮到你

题干是如何说明 the oceanographers' hypothesis is false 的呢，它引入了一个实验说明：即使加了这个iron， local iron cocentrations  increased immediately，却没有产生a thriving plankon population

现在我们要找的选项就是说明这样的反驳是错误的，预测选项应该针对这个实验：加入iron

D选项攻击点在于原文的immidiately，说明加入iron的操作实际上并没有导致iron的增加（过几天iron就被冲走了），那就说明这个实验没有参考价值，因此也就不能说明the oceanographers' hypothesis is false了

gar_bbbbb

关键在于读懂题。。。
结论是反对海洋学学者的说法。
问的是反对（反对海洋学学者）的说法，就是支持海洋学者的说法。
好绕啊TAT。

D选项表示有他因。

还有请问这道题应该分类到什么题型啊？？