evalute必须要有作者本人的观点，尤其是对于好坏、喜恶、可行与否这样的判断，第二段里显然没有，主要是规律本身的陈述

annually和each year有重复的嫌疑！

光注意想着事件的逻辑关系了，把最基本的错误忽略了……唉

In fact, in 1970 the SBA explicitly stated that their main goal was to increase the number of minority-owned businesses

commend：称赞，不是单纯的评论

C取非：钓鱼者对保护白鱼没兴趣。
因此在被卡片告知的情况下看到了食用白鱼的ruffe，也不会去care ruffe，这样一来方案无效
取非削弱即原句增强

《相关-因果》===削弱
P：因为do good的人活得久
C：所以定期do good导致活得久
CQ：同时提及do good+活得久；或者给出导致活得久的其他原因

没看到EXCEPT就直接选了_(:з」∠)_

PT公司的支出超过了可承受范围
BF1-PT不可能减少政策，所以它不能保护自己免受大额支出
所以，PT决定给政策的持有者折扣
很多人装了防盗设施，由于折扣可以覆盖成本
BF2-结果，因为装了防盗设施的车很少被偷，PT的计划可以减少支出


BF1，BF2都是观点，不是evidence,杀A
BF2就是conclusion,不是为了去support…,杀CDE
B-BF1是作者要去评价的观点，BF2是作者自己的观点，也就是文章的结论

present X Y = present Y to X
presents a problem a response = presents a response to a problem
to which the argument assesses是修饰response的

bf2明显是conclusion，不可能是E里的judgment

周一回来，说明周六没下雨，周日没下雨，周一下雨了。

每天下雨的概率是0.2，不下是0.8

所以周一回来的概率就是周六不下雨的概率×周日不下雨的概率×周一下雨的概率＝0.8*0.8*0.2＝0.128

思路：目的：提高L市的savings----提出special account方案----special accounts上累积了很多钱----说明政府这个方案是成功的-----削弱：如果很多人只是把钱从一个savings转到special savings的话，那对于增加savings总量没有帮助 另外A很迷惑人，按照正常储蓄账户你但凡动了点钱interest就没了。。。不过这个作为反驳原文不太成立，感觉跟原文最后说累积了很多钱在special account上矛盾，与原文矛盾

individuals of one genetic composition=those of another

without large earthquakes可以有两种解释，一种是小地震，一种是没有地震。既然后面可能没有地震，那就不能预测地震发生的时间了。因为即使有tremor，也可能没地震。这个招就废了。

定位句：but ownership of these appliances did not correlate with less time spent on housework by full-time home workers

The prevailing view mentioned in the first sentence has been countered by the work done by 2 scholars.

定位句：Vanek analyzed 40 years of timeuse surveys conducted by home economists to argue that electrical appliances and other modern household technologies reduced the effort required to perform specific tasks, but ownership of these appliances did not correlate with less time spent on housework by full-time home workers.

This would imply that once maximum tunneling time is reached, tunneling speed will increase without limit as barrier thickness increases.

直到的关系：once maximum, will increase without limit = no maximum, not increase without limit