In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Verland used wooden sleds with runners and steering bars. Ten years ago, smooth plastic sleds became popular; they go faster than wooden sleds but are harder to steer and slow. The concern that plastic sleds are more dangerous is clearly borne out by the fact that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago.

Which of the following, if true in Verland, most seriously undermines the force of the evidence cited?

A. A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.

B. Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.

C. Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.

D. Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.

E. Because the traditional wooden sled can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.

答案有B有C,我觉得是A。

证明塑料雪橇危险的证据是使用雪橇的孩子受伤的绝对数据比以前大，要削弱这个数据B显然没用，C中的应用范围和危险指数或者孩子受伤的数量也没必然联系。A说还有一部分孩子用传统雪橇，就说明证据里的数字不一定是塑料雪橇造成的。另外一种方法削弱就是说10年后使用雪橇的孩子基数也大大增加了，但选项里没有类似的。C有点像，但范围和人数没有必然联系。

不知道有没有标准答案？

open to discuss

我觉得A是support.现在用wooden的少，用plastic的多，不正说明plastic的危险性大些吗

B似乎是提供了他因，但我觉得对wooden和plastic来说条件都一样，不能破坏plastic比wooden更危险的说法，更象是out of scope。

C.提供他因，因为Plastic的应用范围广，所以受伤的多，并不是plastic比wooden更危险。

D.无关

E.没有说Plastic的情况怎么样。inappropriate.

更快速排除的话，题目结论是plastic和wooden相对比较情况怎样，所有选项中只有C是两种情况的比较。

open to discuss

我觉得A是support.现在用wooden的少，用plastic的多，不正说明plastic的危险性大些吗

A 的重点在于 Still, 说明受伤的人数中有一部分是由Wooden Sled 造成的, 就不好说 plastic 比 wooden 危险了.

是啊，Ｃ也是很有道理的．等高手．

The concern that plastic sleds are more dangerous is clearly borne out by the fact that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago.

Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.--------