太狡猾了

错选D,没有仔细看D后面的......
作者提出了一个alternative explanation，咋可能用evidence去反驳它

错在没搞清楚比较对象是谁。

注意：体会confirm和convince
confirm是证实了科学家们的推测
但是文章中说的是dispel了科学家们的doubts，也就是说驱散了他们的怀疑，使他们信服

those 是个代词，在平行结构中，不是所有的平行部分都用“that of ”来表达就是最对的，如果that or those找不到指代对象的话也是不能乱用的。

做题时 应该仔细分析下结构

The phrase “so that” suggests some sort of purpose, or at least expresses a rationale for accomplishing something. You could say “I eat burritos so that I will someday weigh as much as an aircraft carrier” or “Domenico posts regularly on GMAT Club so that other people can kick ass on this ridiculous exam.” In both cases, a purpose or effect follows the phrase “so that.”

2.'as' may mean simultaneity or even causality but not contrast. Contrast is an essential feature in this context. 'As' is an improper diction because the cool air mass is going to be ushered despite the dry weather for several days. One can safely keep off this choice.

a.1.Metaphorically, it is used about anything that brings something into existence. The basic idiom is: I usher X in.
If I want to specify the region in which this X is introduced, I would say:I usher X into A.
The "in . . . into" is redundant and wrong

短题考逻辑，长题看语法。。。没有考点的时候核心词就出来了

B和题目矛盾

the modifier "under provisions of the new maritime code" is placed in a location that is somewhat ambiguous -- it seems to suggest that the sea areas themselves are under those provisions.
(this is certainly not a fatal error, but you should notice it in contrast to the other answer choices, in which that modifier is moved to a more logically sound location).

(a) is redundant (provisions ... provide)

c：
COMMA + -ING modifiers must modify the preceding clause, but the -ING participle must also apply to the subject of the preceding clause.
therefore, the use of that comma+ing modifier would imply that the islets themselves are stimulating disputes. that's not true.

充分说明了修饰语要尽可能的放在他想要修饰的地方

if the Los Angeles metropolitan area is counted as a separate nation, 一定要用虚拟语气吗？

否定才能用so 二选一错了......

as...as前后要平行
不过我之前买的新东方GMAT语法上有一条公理，说...enough都不正确。根据OG的做题经验，没有绝对性。

having won应改为winning。在分词短语中加have表示先时性，在逻辑上，不可能win这个动作先发生于perform

C/D/E中补出of后逻辑意思错误：
The combination of X and Y，表意为X何Y两个元素的结合，逻辑意思正确。
The combination of X and (the combination) of Y，表意两个combination，但是单独的water supply/good growing conditions无法被称为combination，逻辑意思错误。