C的despite floods in the midwest drought in the south是主语，和are之间有逗号和and，这个是不是也不对呀？

(1) if y > 0, -2x > 0 , therefore x < 0
(2) 5y - 20 = -2x > 3y, therefore 5y-20 . 3y, y > 10,. -2x > 3 *10 , therefore x < 0
D. each is sufficient.

A) 对比E) 发现平行结构不对as indicated in..and by.., as well as... E）中很清晰 is indicated by..., as well as by...
B) 语意有误，根据主干 A ruined structure was indicated by....
C) were错误

第二段加黑是主结论；
A-The first is a claim （Claim只表示宣称，本身没有倾向） the accuracy of which is at issue in the argument;（没有提到准确性的问题，错），the second is a conclusion drawn on the basis of that claim. （对）；排除A
B-Objection（错，题干是研究表明，不是主观的判断，排除B）
C-The first is evidence that has been used to support an explanation（至此对，确实是个证据） that the argument challenges（说前面的证据是对主结论的反对，错，这个证据是倒向/支持主结论的）; the second is that explanation.
D-同C，排除
E-the argument favors（前面的证据是对主结论的支持）

考点 more...than.... ＝》
A) more...rather than...错误
C) more..rather than...错误
考点 平行结构 more likely to do...than to do...

A), yet 表示连接两个句子，但是第二个句子缺少完整的句子结构。yet being so far away from Earth that their apparent.... 由于that引导，导致后面的部分都是修饰成分而非句子主干

我觉得主要的疑惑点是判断最后修饰成分的主语是the cloud 还是 the storm，
A）which引导，应该是指向the storm
B) it指向不明
C）V-ing，应该是指向the cloud
D）根据句子主干，应该是指向the sotrm
E) 根据句子主干，应该是指向the storm

When removed from the water and tilted at various angles with the head up, however, blood pressure at their midpoint drops significantly, and at brain level falls to zero.

A. 西非人没开发过某种主食，一旦米和甘薯引进这种主食就不再种植了；取反则为有一种主食在米和甘薯之前种植过，削弱，正确
B. 没有一种植物是本土的，如果种植，能做主食；谈的是假设，取反为即使有，但也不一定种植，无法削弱结论，错；
体会一下B的if，是一种可能性，不能保证削弱

A句子结构终于看懂了：
most people reported less congestion as the primary benefit

我做错了，（严格按照考场状态做）；就我个人而言，排除ACD很容易，但是误选了B，当时认为B有助于保护栖息地；

Faue's study中怎么体现了这一点？

题目的最后不是讲到了，买的时候收费和丢弃的时候收费的区别吗？这个对题目有影响吗？我老感觉是个因果推理，所以就没有往方案上想

为什呢不是果因推理？？
前提是果，用bill的给钱多
结论是因，因为credit cardlogo让顾客觉得自己钱多

定语修饰紧跟先行词

1. as... as = equally 不能同时一起用
2. be likely to do
3. 比较对象是：旧规下司机的情况和新规下司机的情况

前提： 人猫同墓
结果；猫在务农期前就被养了。
削弱果因推理的方法：
1. 找出导致人猫同墓的另外原因
2. 找出因果不存在联系
选项c： 肯定了结论
选项d： 在同一时期，墓穴发现了其他野生生物和人同葬（说明不一定是驯养，可能是刚好埋在一起）
故推翻原文因果联系

a work that Samuel Johnson pronounced the greatest translation in any language

this is what choice (a) does. if the uranium on land is being depleted, then extracting uranium from seawater will become "commercially viable", out of pure necessity. the cost will go up, but that's the breaks.
choice (c) doesn't actually affect the argument at all, because the argument already acknowledges that uranium will become commercially viable IF the price comes down.