GWD3-16 【求助】一道逻辑的黑脸题

waytousff

Economist: Tropicorp, which constantly seeks profitable investment opportunities, has been buying and clearing sections of tropical forest for cattle ranching, although pastures newly created there become useless for grazing after just a few years. The company has not gone into rubber tapping, even though greater profits can be made from rubber tapping, which leaves the forest intact. Thus, some environmentalists conclude that Tropicorp has not acted wholly out of economic self-interest. However, these environmentalists are probably wrong. The initial investment required for a successful rubber-tapping operation is larger than that needed for a cattle ranch. Furthermore, there is a shortage of workers employable in rubber-tapping operations, and finally, taxes are higher on profits from rubber tapping than on profits from cattle ranching.

In the economist's argument, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

• A  The first supports the conclusion of the economist's argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
• B  The first states the conclusion of the economist's argument; the second supports that conclusion.
• C  The first supports the environmentalists' conclusion; the second states that conclusion.
• D  The first states the environmentalists' conclusion; the second states the conclusion of the economist's argument.
• E  Each supports the conclusion of the economist's argument.

     如题，求各位NN们过来详细解释下啊。
里面的关系怎么分的啊。

Knightll

选C
首先分清楚economists和environmentalists
第二句前面说的是：environmentalists conclude that ****
而且题干里有：even  ***, thus environmentalists conclude that ***
很清楚的因果关系

实际上解题时候我也不会这么分析，整句话看懂了意思，看清楚选项，也就知道怎么选了。

waytousff

啊，谢谢，解释得很清楚。
开始主要是没有分清楚谁说了什么