[求助]逻辑大全-3-12

hedgeforfun

Meteorologists say that if only they could design an accurate mathematical model of the atmosphere with all its complexities, they could forecast the weather with real precision. But this is an idle boast, immune to any evaluation, for any inadequate weather forecast would obviously be blamed on imperfections in the model.

12. Which of the following, if true, could best be used as a basis for arguing against the author’s position that the meteorologists’ claim cannot be evaluated?

(A) Certain unusual configurations of data can serve as the basis for precise weather forecasts even though the exact causal mechanisms are not understood.

(B) Most significant gains in the accuracy of the relevant mathematical models are accompanied by clear gains in the precision of weather forecasts.

(C) Mathematical models of the meteorological aftermath of such catastrophic events as volcanic eruptions are beginning to be constructed.

(D) Modern weather forecasts for as much as a full day ahead are broadly correct about 80 percent of the time.

(E) Meteorologists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct.

Ans: B

为什么啊？不得要领？
各位NN指点啊！

himba

本题看似削弱题，实际是一种挑错题，其结构是：

Meteorologists：Perfect Math Model => Real Precise Weather Forecast

作者不同意这个观点但却没有给出任何削弱这个命题的有效依据，而只是把原题的逆反命题作为反对的理由。该作者的题干为：

Author: Inadequate Weather Forecast => Imperfections in the Math

Model (注意不要搞反了充分和必要条件)

问题要求找出一个事实，来证明作者的错误。实际我们需要找到任何一个事实，只要能够帮助证明气象学家关于天气预测和数学模型的判断是错误或是正确的，就是本题的答案。

apply1

只要找到一种方法能够评价模型就可以了。

poorleafs

甲说：只要我能上树，就能把月亮摘下来。

乙说：这完全是凭空吹牛。只要你摘不下来月亮，你就会说“这都是因为我爬不上树啊”。（隐含的意思是：上树和摘月亮哪有什么关系啊。）

新闻报道说：中国有个甲，他站的高度和月亮离地球的距离居然成正比。

清楚了？