The earliest Mayan pottery found at Colha, in Belize, is about 3,000 years old. Recently, however, 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were unearthed at Colha. These implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period, also found at Colha. Moreover, the implements' designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times. Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
The earliest Mayan pottery found at Colha, in Belize, is about 3,000 years old. Recently, however, 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were unearthed at Colha. These implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period, also found at Colha. Moreover, the implements’ designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times. Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) Ceramic ware is not known to have been used by the Mayan people to make agricultural implements.
(B) Carbon-dating of corn pollen in Colha indicates that agriculture began there around 4,500 years ago.
(C) Archaeological evidence indicates that some of the oldest stone implements found at Colha were used to cut away vegetation after controlled burning of trees to open areas of swampland for cultivation.
(D) Successor cultures at a given site often adopt the style of agricultural implements used by earlier inhabitants of the same site.
(E) Many religious and social institutions of the Mayan people who inhabited Colha 3,000 years ago relied on a highly developed system of agricultural symbols.
V1 from 花子落落
还有一题，说投票人可以怎么样投给那些新的提议还是什么让它变成law。business 的公司还是什么组织就想通过广告影响选票人吧，让他们支持一个什么有利于business的提议吧。但是有人说不可能，因为之前这个公司还是什么组织花大钱做广告，也没有用。问反对后面的反对意见的。选项有1.越来越多滴人投票（ms是这个意思）2.business的这个公司或是组织现在能更有效率滴花钱去打击那些不利于business的提议吧。3.只记得有exacerbate这个单词。
V2 from BlueheartTseng
又想起来一道洛基，应该是gwd原题，说一个地方投票还是什么，bussiness花钱做广告影响这些投票人做有利他们的投票什么的，但是结果却是没有什么有利于business的提议通过，然后问削弱，应该是阻止了不利于business的提议通过。
V3 from julycloud (760)
遇见第一道逻辑很长，说通过广告来游说神马东西（抱歉我词汇量不好，但一定碰见不认识也要淡定，本人之前受阅读打击惯了），但是说其实似乎好像没有用，应削减广告费用--问削弱。然后我选的是--广告游说有一定用途，虽然不能带来对其有利的法律通过，但可以减少对其不利的法案通过（答案应该是对的） 我觉得当时，有关无关很重要，能让你更有信心的选下去呵呵！
V4 from sk999 (V38)
同意V2和V3的选择，其实这道题的逻辑就是用反对一个问题的反面来证明一个问题的正面。
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2013-6-25 19:29:53
收藏
收藏
楼主