|
原题贴如下：有点长：（
According to a theory advanced by researcher Paul Martin, the wave of species extinctions that occurred in North America about 11,000 years ago, at the end of the Pleistocene era, can be directly attributed to the arrival of humans, i.e., the Paleoindians, who were ancestors of modern Native Americans. However, anthropologist Shepard Krech points out that large animal species vanished even in areas where there is no evidence to demonstrate that Paleoindians hunted them. Nor were extinctions confined to large animals: small animals, plants, and insects disappeared, presumably not all through human consumption. Krech also contradicts Martin’s exclusion of climatic change as an explanation by asserting that widespread climatic change did indeed occur at the end of the Pleistocene. Still, Krech attributes secondary if not primary responsibility for the extinctions to the Paleoindians, arguing that humans have produced local extinctions elsewhere.
Q6:
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Krech’s objections to Martin’s theory?
- Further studies showing that the climatic change that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene era was even more severe and widespread than was previously believed
- New discoveries indicating that Paleoindians made use of the small animals, plants, and insects that became extinct
- Additional evidence indicating that widespread climatic change occurred not only at the end of the Pleistocene era but also in previous and subsequent eras
- Researchers’ discoveries that many more species became extinct in North America at the end of the Pleistocene era than was previously believed
- New discoveries establishing that both the arrival of humans in North America and the wave of Pleistocene extinctions took place much earlier than 11,000 years ago
B or C or others？？
C的削弱方式应该是有因无果（有A 发生，但B没有发生）削弱，常理上可以接受。
但是有因无果削弱，尤其是用时间跨度削弱（题目说现在有A 发生，所以B发生，削弱说过去就有A发生过），在OG中几乎没有作为正确选项过。作为错误选项到倒是有（OG29）题目如下：
The number of people diagnosed as having a certain intestinal disease has dropped significantly in a rural county this year, as compared to last year. Health officials attribute this decrease entirely to improved sanitary conditions at water-treatment plants, which made for cleaner water this year and thus reduced the incidence of the disease.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the health officials’ explanation for the lower incidence of the disease?
A. Many new water-treatment plants have been built in the last five years in the rural county.
B. Bottled spring water has not been consumed in significantly different quantities by people diagnosed as having the intestinal disease, as compared to people who did not contract the disease.
C. Because of a new diagnostic technique, many people who until this year would have been diagnosed as having the intestinal disease are now correctly diagnosed as suffering from intestinal ulcers.
D. Because of medical advances this year, far fewer people who contract the intestinal disease will develop severe cases of the disease.
E. The water in the rural county was brought up to the sanitary standards of the water in neighboring counties ten years ago.
A项可以认为是跨时间的有因无果，但ETS认为“Since A supports the view that sanitary conditions have been improving, it tends to support the officials’ explanation.”
所以很困惑这种时间跨度削弱（题目说现在有A 发生，所以B发生，削弱说过去就有A发生过）是否能够作为削弱！！
 请NN指教！
[此贴子已经被作者于2005-2-15 22:50:04编辑过] | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2005-1-29 22:19:00
楼主
