※ 引述《pringless (pringles~*)》之铭言： : 44. Although the prevailing supposition has been that it is too hot for : microorganisms to survive deep below the Earth's surface, some scientists : argue that there are living communities of microorganisms there that have : been cut off from surface life for millions of years. These scientists base : their argument on the discovery of living microorganisms in samples of : material that were taken from holes drilled as deep as 1.74 miles. : The scientists' argument depends on which of the following assumptions? : (B)No holes have been drilled into the Earth's surface to a distance deeper : than 1.74 miles. : (C)The microorganisms did not come from surface soil that came into contact : with the drilling equipment. : 正确答案是（C） 想请问一下(B)把NO拿掉变成有发现比1.74更深的洞 不是反驳原文 : 说因为深层太热所以没办法存活吗？ 那为什麽不能当假设阿 原文说深达 1.74Mile 的地方有细菌，所以证明细菌存在於地下 深处。 而把NO拿掉，代表有洞 ＞＝1.74Mile,而还找得到细菌，那更证明 地下深处有细菌，没有反驳原文，反而是支持，所以加上 NO 并没 有成为「反驳的反驳」，所以不能当假设。 : 50. To produce seeds, plants must first produce flowers. Two kinds of : tarragon plants, Russian tarragon and French tarragon, look very similar : except that Russian tarragon produces flowers and French tarragon does not. : The leaves of Russian tarragon, however, lack the distinctive flavor that : makes French tarragon a desirable culinary herb. : If the information presented is true, which of the following can most : reliably be concluded on the basis of it? : (C)Plants that grow from seeds sold in a packet labeled "tarragon" are not : French tarragon. : (E)Garden plants that have flavorful leaves generally do not produce : flowers. : 为什麽(E)不对呀？ R有花=>不香 F没有花=>不香 不是满合理的推测吗....=___= 原文的花只有 tarragon，而（E）答案说的是「所有的 garden plants」 所以若选（E）则会「从部分例子推整体」而犯了归纳的错。 : 另外 我有点不懂来欣谢老师的他因 复因欸^^" : 像51. New regulations in Mullentown require manufacturers there to develop : five-year pollution-reduction plans. The regulations require that each : manufacturer develop a detailed plan for reducing its released pollutants by : at least 50 percent. Clearly, the regulations will not result in significant : ^^^^^^^^ : pollution reduction, however, since the regulations do not force : manufacturers to implement their plans. : Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument? : 这题我原本想说是will 所以代表结果为发生=>推翻果 用复因 : 但是解析是说另有他因可造成此结果 让我有点搞混他因跟复因的使用时机跟方法了 : 请教各位牛人 帮忙指点迷津 谢谢！！>____<" 原文的「结果」是「不会导致」(will not result in)，而此「结果」 尚未发生，因此应该「推翻结果」，所以方法该为「复因」，因此加 入新原因後，会「导致」，而推翻了「原结果」。 根据原 po 所说， 看起来解析中所说的「他因可造成此结果」中的「结果」，似为「 significant pollution reduction」，而非「will not result in significant pollution reduction」，所以才会觉得弄反了。 此题应该还是用「复因」没错，而非用「他因」。 参考看看。 --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 220.133.109.4