111. 再更新一道逻辑题BD,应该是GWD上的,不过我没有找着:
苏格兰(还是爱尔兰)的森林已经没有了,有科学家说是人类造成的。反对意见说在苏格兰,人类历史是多久,泥沼中沉积物的厚度是多少(evidence1),而每厘米厚度要多少年才能形成(evidence2),所以跟人类的砍伐无关。 问题是问这两个部分起什么作用
经作者确认,是这道:
Ecologists: the Scottish Highlands were once the site of extensive forests, but these forests have mostly disappeared and been replaced by peat bogs. The common view is that the Highland’s deforestation was caused by human activity, especially agriculture. However, agriculture began in the Highlands less than 2,000 years ago. Peat bogs, which consist of compressed decayed vegetable matter, build up by only about one foot per 1000 years, and, throughout the Highlands, remains of trees in peat bogs are almost all at depth great than four feet. Since climate changes that occurred between 7,000 years and 4,000 years ago favored the development of peat bogs rather than the survival of forests, the deforestation was more likely the result of natural processes than of human activity. 选B
In the ecologist’s argument, the two portions in boldfaces play which of the following roles?
A. The first is evidence that has been used in support of a position that the argument rejects; the second is a finding that the ecologist uses to counter the evidence.
B. The first is evidence that, in light of the evidence provided in the second, serves as grounds for the ecologist’s rejection of a certain position
C. The first is a position that the ecologist rejects; the second is evidence that has been used in support of that position.
D. The first is a position that the ecologist rejects; the second provides evidence in support of that rejection.
E. The first is a position for which the ecologist argues; the second provides evidence to support that position.
答案是:第一部分是一个evidence,利用第二部分的证据做出推断,一起反对科学家的论断。大意如此。 |