Early in the twentieth century, Lake Konfa became very polluted. Recently fish populations have recovered as release of industrial pollutants has declined and the lake's waters have become cleaner. Fears are now being voiced that the planned construction of an oil pipeline across the lake's bottom might revive pollution and cause the fish population to decline again. However, a technology for preventing leaks is being installed. Therefore, provided this technology is effective, those fears are groundless.

The argument depends on assuming which of the following?


Apart from development related to the pipeline, there will be no new industrial development around the lake that will create renewed pollution in its waters.

There is no reason to believe that the leak-preventing technology would be ineffective when installed in the pipeline in Lake Konfa.

The bottom of the lake does not contain toxic remnants of earlier pollution that will be stirred into the water by pipeline construction.

Damage to the lake's fish populations would be the only harm that a leak of oil from the pipeline would cause.

The species of fish that are present in Lake Konfa now are the same as those that were in the lake before it was affected by pollution.

加入错题本 分享
纠错
考题讲解

情景：Konfa曾经被污染的很严重，现在被治理的很好。但是，最近政府打算在Konfa湖的湖底安装一条输油管道。有些人担心安装输油管道可能会导致湖水再次被污染。因此，只要有一个防止漏油的技术有效，那么这些担心就是多余的。

推理：

前提：一个防止漏油的技术可以让油管不漏
结论：不用担心安装输油管道可能会导致湖水再次被污染

答案预估：

那些“湖水不会被再次污染”的其它必要条件（常理上能保真推理出的一切结果）不存在。

选项分析：

A选项：除掉油管的发展，在湖的周围不会有工业发展给湖水带来污染。本论证的结论是“水底油管不会污染整个湖”，而非“整个湖不会被污染”。

B选项：没有理由相信这个不漏油的技术会在Lake Konfa失效。文章的结论已经非常明确的给出“假设这个技术没问题”，所以本选项和推理无关。

C选项：Correct. 输油管放入湖中的时候不会把已经沉淀在湖底的污染物再度搅动出来。这显然是“湖水不会被再次污染”的另一个必要条件。

D选项：漏油带来的唯一危害就是让湖里的鱼的数量下降。本选项和湖水是否会被污染无关

E选项：现在湖里的鱼和其被污染以前的鱼的种类相同。本选项和湖水是否会被污染无关。

展开显示

登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论

DaQuan-CR
考点