2. The average life expectancy for the United States population as a whole is 73.9 years, but children born in
Hawaii will live an average of 77 years, and those born in Louisiana, 71.7 years. If a newlywed couple from
Louisiana were to begin their family in Hawaii, therefore, their children would be expected to live longer than
would be the case if the family remained in Louisiana.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn in the passage?
A. Insurance company statisticians do not believe that moving to Hawaii will significantly lengthen the average
Louisianan’s life.
B. The governor of Louisiana has falsely alleged that statistics for his state are inaccurate.
C. The longevity ascribed to Hawaii’s current population is attributable mostly to genetically determined factors.
D. Thirty percent of all Louisianans can expect to live longer than 77 years.
E. Most of the Hawaiian Islands have levels of air pollution well below the national average for the United
States.
D fails to weaken the conclusion because it is consistent with the information given and the conclusion about life
expectancy.这里说与文章中一致所以就没weaken,这是怎么理解的，是否是这个意思：与文章中说的大意相同就等于没有任何推导过程，所以什么也不是，所以没有weaken?
By suggesting that Hawaii’s environment is in one respect particularly healthy, E supports the conclusion.想问一下E怎么就是加强结论：在H就会活得长久？不是说有空气污染吗？还在国标以下，那不就是很严重吗，应该是削弱结论啊。 | 
