[求助]求助各位G友一道本月逻辑JJ题~~

xin861123

 

Rabbits were introduced to Numa
                        Island in the nineteenth century.  Overgrazing by the enormous population of rabbits now menaces the island’s agriculture.  The government proposes to reduce the population by using a virus that has caused devastating epidemics in rabbit populations elsewhere.  There is, however, a chance that the virus will infect the bilby, an endangered native marsupial.  The government’s plan, therefore, may serve the interests of agriculture but will clearly increase the threat to native wildlife.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A.      There is less chance that the virus will infect domestic animals on Numa than that it will infect bilbies.

B.       There are no species of animals on the island that prey on the rabbits.

C.      Overgrazing by rabbits endangers many of the plants on which bilbies feed.

D.      The virus that the government proposes to use has been successfully used elsewhere to control populations of rabbits.

E.       There is no alternative means of reducing the rabbit population that would involve no threat to the bilby

写JJ的朋友没有把答案留下，又没找到在GWD哪里~~求助各位考友，提供下答案~~

小佳

应该是c，削弱了“increase the threat to native wildlife”。

sunie310

我个人认为应该选B

小佳

b的话，文章中并没有说bilby 是吃rabbit的；而且就算文章中说吃了，b也驳斥前提了阿。。

c的意思是overgrazing如果不治理的话也会endanger bilby，治理的话也会endanger，横竖都要endanger。这样结论中的“increase”就站不住脚了。

kelly41099

C.

jarlin

C 记得应该在GWD 的第18 19 20 套里面

bylavender

C，我有核对过NN们的答案

xin861123

谢谢大家啦~~~