原文提到的是环境destruction（或是人为或是自然）使得adaptation/vulnerability下降
而非E选项中的，adaptation/vulnerability to 环境destruction 因人为而下降
前者的逻辑是【人为】→导致→【环境destruction】→导致→【adaptation/vulnerability下降】
后者的逻辑是【人为】→导致→【{adaptation/vulnerability }to {环境destruction}下降】

错选e，把问题想复杂了
以为对应原句：Yet high rates of straying can be problematic because misdirected fish may interbreed with the existing stock to such a degree that any local adaptations that are present become diluted
而这句话也只是说local adaptations diluted，而不是vulnerability to the effects of naturally occurring habitat destruction decline，原文没有提到 to the effects of naturally occurring habitat destruction
实际上，答案就是第一句话：large stretches of salmon habitat have been eliminated by human activity

文章没有反对goal，而是反对strategy

大意了，选成了C

我当时假设n=1，得出的等式是K00+250，将K带入（K+2+5)/9都不能得到正确答案。当时真的是鬼迷心窍了啊，哭……

That's why this option weakens. It exposes another factor that can explain a substantial part of the correlation.
所以B选项相当于引入了一个干扰因素，从而削弱了social interactions 和mental skills之间的相关关系。
而不是因果方向问题。

option B is pointing out that the reason why the correlation appears pronounced is because there are many illnesses impacting both social and mental skills. If that were true, then we'd see artificial inflation in the connection between a lack of mental sharpness and social skill. However, that doesn't mean we can reach the conclusion found in the prompt and say that being social boosts mental sharpness.

which和that都不能指代人

大家可以看看这个解释。https://gmatclub.com/forum/it-is-widely-assumed-that-people-need-to-engage-in-intellectual-activi-202263.html
我觉得这是后续解释中最精华的一句：

老师 请问D选项逻辑上错误吗？
我的思路：
方案推理 目标-提高利润
方案-外包部分业务给能提供更低成本的供应商
D 通过竞标选择供应商（竞标方式确保供应商的价格更低）

更新？

At the time when the train passed

老师绝壁想说的是只有 IF 和 WHEN 可以连接。笔误了吧

B千万不要想逆否命题，因果关系不要用命题！命题只是一种判断

B 如果改成which travels就对了吗?

命题AB之间不是因果关系，而只是发生和不发生的关系，你理解一下这个。

E选项与全文主旨相悖。全文一直在强调无论在1830之前还是之后，judicial bias against patentees 都是错误的，其实是由于adherence to patent law的问题。

not until 1955 was it hypothesized—by Wigner and Eisenbud—that tunneling particles sometimes travel faster than light.