[罗技] 弎月二时柒起罗技整理（壹佰零二只 更新时间4/29 8:36)

piscesu

请用这只（OG12-85)

Networks of blood vessels in bats’ wings serve only to disperse heat generated in flight. This heat is generated only because bats flap their wings. Thus paleontologists’ recent discovery that the winged dinosaur Sandactylus had similar networks of blood vessels in the skin of its wings provides evidence for the hypothesis that Sandactylus flew by flapping its wings, not just by gliding.

In the passage, the author develops the argument by
(A) forming the hypothesis that best explains several apparently conflicting pieces of evidence
(B) reinterpreting evidence that had been used to support an earlier theory
(C) using an analogy with a known phenomenon to draw a conclusion about an unknown phenomenon
(D) speculating about how structures observed in present-day creatures might have developed from similar structures in creatures now extinct
(E) pointing out differences in the physiological demands that flight makes on large, as opposed to small, creatures

EXP.

A The evidence of the blood vessels in the wings does not conflict with other evidence.
B The evidence of the blood vessels in the wings is used to support only one theory—that
Sandactylus flew by flapping its wings as well as by gliding; no evidence is discussed in relation to any earlier theory.
C Correct. This statement properly identifies how the argument compares the wings of bats and of Sandactylus in order to draw a conclusion about how the dinosaur flew.
D The argument is not about how the structures in the bats developed from the structures in the dinosaurs, but rather about how Sandactylus flew.
E The comparison between bats and Sandactylus points out similarities, not differences.

piscesu

另外说明一下，前面的两只不是GMAT滴，貌似像是LSAT或者其他神马。

对于V1 (Recently discovered fossil evidence casts.... etc.)
EXP.
As (E) says, the argument presents evidence that a past phenomenon — I guess dinosaurs can be considered a "phenomenon" — is more similar to one rather than the other of two present-day phenomena. Dinos, the argument claims, are more like present-day warm-blooded animals (such as birds) than they are like present-day cold-blooded animals (such as reptiles). And the evidence compares the dinos of yesteryear with birds and reptiles of today. (Perhaps if you recalled this bird vs. reptile thing from Jurassic Park it was a little easier to understand.) Contrary to (A), the argument doesn't discuss the information that the opposing position— that dinosaurs were cold-blooded — is based on. It makes its case by discussing the evidence for its own side, not by tearing apart the opposing side's evidence. As for (B), the argument doesn't state a "general principle," then apply it to a particular case. Rather, it builds up a claim that dinosaurs may have been warm-blooded (which can't really be called a "general principle") based on fossil evidence — so it really moves from the specific to the general, not the other way around. (C) has everything twisted: The argument uses historical evidence (about dinos) as well as contemporary evidence (about present-day birds and reptiles) to make a claim about the past (that dinos were warmblooded); it doesn't dismiss a claim about the present. (D)'s gobbledygook would describe an argument something like this: All warm-blooded animals have hollow bones. Dinos had hollow bones. Therefore, dinos were warm-blooded. But the argument doesn't do this: It doesn't discuss one "certain property," but builds its case from several examples of traits shared by dinos and present-day warm-blooded creatures. And the language is also more qualified than (D) would have it: It says that some, not all, dinos had hollow bones; some dinos had a highly arched mouth roof; many had a growth rate typical of warmblooded animal etc.

对于V2. (Paleontologists hypothesize that modern birds evolved from the family of dinosaurs that ... etc.)
暂无EXP. 但是看了WIKI及资料感觉像是4，但是个人选的5。。。有点纠结求OA）

munaiyipop

辛苦辛苦...4月15考.....都靠自愿整理寂静的各位战友了... 加油！！谢谢你们的无私！！！！！！！！！！！老夫现在逻辑最差..... 希望考试RP爆发啊

dxyl

感谢~~~

vivianzhuofan

另外说明一下，前面的两只不是GMAT滴，貌似像是LSAT或者其他神马。

对于V1 (Recently discovered fossil evidence casts.... etc.)
EXP.
As (E) says, the argument presents evidence that a past phenomenon — I guess dinosaurs can be considered a "phenomenon" — is more similar to one rather than the other of two present-day phenomena. Dinos, the argument claims, are more like present-day warm-blooded animals (such as birds) than they are like present-day cold-blooded animals (such as reptiles). And the evidence compares the dinos of yesteryear with birds and reptiles of today. (Perhaps if you recalled this bird vs. reptile thing from Jurassic Park it was a little easier to understand.) Contrary to (A), the argument doesn't discuss the information that the opposing position— that dinosaurs were cold-blooded — is based on. It makes its case by discussing the evidence for its own side, not by tearing apart the opposing side's evidence. As for (B), the argument doesn't state a "general principle," then apply it to a particular case. Rather, it builds up a claim that dinosaurs may have been warm-blooded (which can't really be called a "general principle") based on fossil evidence — so it really moves from the specific to the general, not the other way around. (C) has everything twisted: The argument uses historical evidence (about dinos) as well as contemporary evidence (about present-day birds and reptiles) to make a claim about the past (that dinos were warmblooded); it doesn't dismiss a claim about the present. (D)'s gobbledygook would describe an argument something like this: All warm-blooded animals have hollow bones. Dinos had hollow bones. Therefore, dinos were warm-blooded. But the argument doesn't do this: It doesn't discuss one "certain property," but builds its case from several examples of traits shared by dinos and present-day warm-blooded creatures. And the language is also more qualified than (D) would have it: It says that some, not all, dinos had hollow bones; some dinos had a highly arched mouth roof; many had a growth rate typical of warmblooded animal etc.

对于V2. (Paleontologists hypothesize that modern birds evolved from the family of dinosaurs that ... etc.)
暂无EXP. 但是看了WIKI及资料感觉像是4，但是个人选的5。。。有点纠结求OA）

-- by 会员 piscesu (2011/3/28 8:24:20)

谢谢 你提供OG原题！！
V2选4 因为原题说的是no evidence feathered dinosaurs has yet been found。而5中只是说The thousands of dinosaur fossils excavated by paleontologists represent only a tiny fraction of the billions of dinosaurs that once lived. 并没有直接证明为什么no evidence 的问题。

lenap

谢谢楼主！

zzzzzzme

楼主秋 密码 那个打不开啊

mijianture

感谢LZ的辛苦付出

clumsy123

哈哈哈哈哈哈飘过。。。纯粹来支持LZ的~

vivianzhuofan

哈哈哈哈哈哈飘过。。。纯粹来支持LZ的~

-- by 会员 clumsy123 (2011/3/28 16:27:56)

谢谢嗷嗷嗷！！！你6.9给力喔，等着你给大家提供寂静啊~~