返回列表 发帖

大全-18-3

3. A 20 percent decline in lobster catches in Maine waters since 1980 can be justifiably blamed on legislation passed in 1972 to protect harbor seals. Maine’s population of harbor seals is now double the level existing before protection was initiated, and these seals are known to eat both fish and lobsters.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?

(A) Harbor seals usually eat more fish than lobsters, but the seals are natural predators of both.

(B) Although harbor seals are skillful predators of lobsters, they rarely finish eating their catch.

(C) Harbor seals attract tourists to Maine’s coastal areas, thus revitalizing the local economy.

(D) Authors of the 1972 legislation protecting harbor seals were convinced that an increase in that animal’s numbers would not have a measurably negative impact on the lobster catch.E

(E) The record lobster harvests of the late 1970’s removed large numbers of mature lobsters from the reproductive stock.

请问各位NN,D为什么不对?

非常感谢

收藏 分享

结论是:1972年开始海豹多了导致1980年后虾少了。问削弱。

A:除了重复原文的内容外,又加了一点无关信息,即吃鱼多。

B:很少吃完虾;无关。反正吃不完估计也死了,归根结底会使虾数量减少。

C:无关。

D:立法者的态度已经不重要了。

E:70年代后期的记录显示很多成年虾(会生育小虾的哦)被捕;他因,说明不一定是海豹把虾干掉啦。

TOP

该题逻辑关系是seal数量增加-----〉捕到的Lobster减少

标准答案E中给出一个它因,E说因为70年代捕的lobster太多,繁殖不过来,所以80年代捕到的少了~

而D只是说那个法规的作者相信seal增加对lobster数量无影响,只是个主观上的想法,并不能用来weaken前面的话

TOP

返回列表

站长推荐 关闭


美国top10 MBA VIP申请服务

自2003年开始提供 MBA 申请服务以来,保持着90% 以上的成功率,其中Top10 MBA服务成功率更是高达95%


查看