求解一道gwd逻辑

purplehana

                                    Critics of certain pollution-control regulations have claimed that the money spent over the last decade in order to reduce emissions of carbon monoxide and of volatile organic compounds has been wasted. The evidence they offer in support of this claim might appear compelling: despite the money spent, annual emissions of these pollutants have been increasing steadily. This evidence is far from adequate, however, since over the last decade a substantial number of new industrial facilities that emit these pollutants have been built.

In the reasoning given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?                                    
                                    

• AThe first identifies a claim that the reasoning seeks to show is false; the second is evidence that has been cited by others in support of that claim.
• BThe first identifies a claim that the reasoning seeks to show is false; the second is a position for which the reasoning seeks to provide support.
• CThe first is a position that the reasoning contends is inadequately supported by the evidence; the second is a position for which the reasoning seeks to provide support.
• DThe first is a position that the reasoning contends is inadequately supported by the evidence; the second is evidence used to support the reasoning's contention.
• EThe first is a position that the reasoning contends is inadequately supported by the evidence; the second is evidence that has been used to support that position.
  

我选A了= =答案是D，求各位大神解释。。。
谢谢

ashlyzhu

一些评论说：花在减少排放的钱被浪费了，证据是排放量稳定增长。结论是：这些证据不足，因为过去十年，大量的新的工业兴起 了。
所以第一个boldface是文章反对的点，第二个是为了证明文章的观点的证据。所以两个boldface是反的。
我觉得A不对，因为A说the second is the evidence that has been cited by others in support of that claim。不是support,而是weaken.
根据第二个boldface是evidence,排除B,C。根据两个boldface作用是反得，排除AE.。。。

purplehana

ashlyzhu 发表于 2013-9-14 15:08
一些评论说：花在减少排放的钱被浪费了，证据是排放量稳定增长。结论是：这些证据不足，因为过去十年，大量 ...

谢谢啊~明白了~~=w=