请教补充教材52

sunshinemuji

Meteorologist 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.

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)Meteorolofists readily concede that the accurate mathematical model they are talking about is not now in their power to construct.
这题应该是找支持气象学家的选项即可。
请分析一下这题的解题思路，以及A选项的意思
谢谢

napoleon

结论是： M家吹牛，因为他可将weather forecast不准确的责任推给 model。
WEAKEN
A）某种不寻常的数的结构可以尾精确预报提供基础，尽管...
B）大多数由MODEL产生的准确的数字同准确的天气预报数字是相符的

A根本没有谈到MODEL，只是我们自己在想这些configuration of data就是MODEL的，没有坚持白痴思维。

Knightll

这题wenken的思路是怎样的？
总觉得很别扭，能不能解释一下？

waytouing

换个角度来考虑会便于理解:

作者是反对气象学家的，题目要求削弱作者的论述，那我们就找支持气象学家的论述。

只有A是支持气象学家的，因为原文中气象学家说：“只要能够设计出一种精确的、涵盖所有复杂气候情况的数学模型，他们就可以精确地预报天气“。A的意思是：某些不寻常的数据可以作为准确天气预报的依据，尽管人们未真正了解其原理。

B削弱了气象学家
C、D不相干
E无法支持气象学家

明白吗？

sunshinemuji

明白了，谢谢

个人认为本题值得继续讨论下去。