Frobisher, a sixteenth-century English explorer, had soil samples from Canada’s Kodlunarn Island examined for gold content. Because high gold content was reported, Elizabeth I funded two mining expeditions. Neither expedition found any gold there. Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. Thus the methods used to determine the gold content of Frobisher’s samples must have been inaccurate. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? - The gold content of the soil on Kodlunarn Island is much lower today than it was in the sixteenth century.
- The two mining expeditions funded by Elizabeth I did not mine the same part of Kodlunarn Island.
- The methods used to assess gold content of the soil samples provided by Frobisher were different from those generally used in the sixteenth century.
- Frobisher did not have soil samples from any other Canadian island examined for gold content.
- Gold was not added to the soil samples collected by Frobisher before the samples were examined.
标准答案是D 我选的是A 百度后人家是这么说的； "F检查了某地的土壤样本，发现含金，于是就去挖金，但是无功而返。
现代人又重新检查了这个样本，发现根本不含金。
于是得到，F的检查方法肯定是错的。
但是我们需要先假设，F那个时候，没有人故意把金加入这些样本。”
但是原文中L Modern analysis of the island’s soil indicates a very low gold content. 并没有说用的是原来F用的样本啊。
我选A主要是这么考虑的：金子作为一种货币大家都努力努力的开采，那么土地中的量也会减少的。现在的含量比以前的高——推出以前的方法肯定是错误的、 | 
