GWD10-Q15

xunjiejie88

GWD-10-Q15
Which of the following most logically completes the argument below?

Although the number of large artificial satellites orbiting the Earth is small compared to the number of small pieces of debris in orbit, the large satellites interfere more seriously with telescope observations because of the strong reflections they produce. Because many of those large satellites have ceased to function, the proposal recently been made to eliminate interference from nonfunctioning satellites by exploding them in space. This proposal, however, is ill conceived, since     .

A.    many nonfunctioning satellites remain in orbit for years
B.    for satellites that have ceased to function, repairing them while they are in orbit would be prohibitively expensive
C.    there are no known previous instances of satellites’ having been exploded on purpose
D.    the only way to make telescope observations without any interference from debris in orbit is to use telescopes launched into extremely high orbits around the Earth
E.    a greatly increased number of small particles in Earth’s orbit would result in a blanket of reflections that would make certain valuable telescope observations impossible
答案是E，想问下D为什么不对？谢啦！

nobody910

大卫星会影响telescope observations 的工作，但是炸掉大卫星并不合适，因为...
A、无关
B、无关。文章为提及cost方面的东西
C、无关。以前有没有和现在没关系
D、为telescope observations 的运行提供了一种方法，但是没有涉及到大卫星，实际上也是无关的
E、这边提到small particles （可能是大卫星爆炸产生的）会对telescope observations 有其他的影响，比较合适
备注：个人觉得E选项也不是很好，因为未明确说明small particles 是由大卫星爆炸产生的

xunjiejie88

谢谢LS，我就是觉得D、E都是提出了一个原因使这个proposal不能成立，可能E提到了reflections,与原文还稍有点关系。

julia_juer

D没有说出原因。原文说，这个构思是不对的，（如果是D的话）因为我们有另外一种办法！（有另外一种办法就能否定这个构思了吗？）
就像这样：
提干：我们要到达上海，但是唯一的一条路上有很多大石块，有人提出：我们可以炸了它们通过，但是，很快，这种方式被认为是错误的。因为。。。。
D：因为我们可以做飞机去。
E：炸了这些大石块，使他们变成了更多的小石块，甚至毁了道路，使更难通过了。

上面这个尽供理解用。

xunjiejie88

明白了！！~ 超级感谢！！~