一道GWD的逻辑求解答！！！

serenashu

Astronomer:Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were.Nevertheless, some indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere.After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur.The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.

In the astronomer’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A.The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.

B.The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim.

C.The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.

D.The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

E.The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.

这题感觉读不太懂~~~

若水天意

答案是什么

serenashu

好像是C~~我去查查，一下子忘了~~

serenashu

恩，是的，是C

若水天意

我没有读题的意思，只是按照这两个黑体在的位置排除了ADE

若水天意

两个黑体都在Nevertheless后面，所以这两句黑体互相一定不是against的关系且一定不是和结论相反的方向，排除AE；第二句黑体在since后面，所以一定不是结论，排除D

若水天意

B的话我感觉第二句不是支持第一句的，而是推出最后结论的原因

serenashu

谢谢LS~~