Biologist: Species with broad geographic ranges probably tend to endure longer than species with narrow ranges. The broader a species’ range, the more likely that species is to survive the extinction of populations in a few areas. Therefore, it is likely that the proportion of species with broad ranges tends to gradually increase with time.
The biologist ’s conclusion follows logically from the above if which of the following is assumed?
There are now more species with broad geographic ranges than with narrow geographic ranges.
Most species can survive extinctions of populations in a few areas as long as the species’ geographic range is not very narrow.
If a population of a species in a particular area dies out, that species generally does not repopulate that area.
If a characteristic tends to help species endure longer, then the proportion of species with that characteristic tends to gradually increase with time.
Any characteristic that makes a species tend to endure longer will make it easier for that species to survive the extinction of populations in a few areas.
前提:活动范围广的动物活得长
结论:活动范围广的动物种群数量会逐渐增多
gap:活得长的动物种群数量会逐渐增多
原因:活动范围广的生物 ---- 活得长
结论:活动范围广的生物 ---- 数量会增加
GAP:活得长 --- 数量会增加
错选了C.
其实把C取反,如果某一物种在一个地方灭绝了,这个物种可以在这个地方重新繁衍。取反之后不能削弱结论
可以重新繁衍不意味着不会重新灭绝——一样的,但是D取非,活得长的特质如果不会增加的话,那活得长的永远只有一点点人,死了就没有了,就不能说porportion逐渐增加了
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
gap题,前提和结论中有相同元素,把前提和结论中的非相同元素架桥
... 选了C,后面想了一下c应该是说明Species with broad geographic ranges probably tend to endure longer than species with narrow ranges. 但是不能说明之后的tends to gradually increase with time.
repopulate ≠ can gradually increase with time
哪个假设帮助本篇文章逻辑合理化。
这个题找gap最清楚,是假设题里少有的可以找gap的题:
前提:活动范围广的动物活得长
结论:活动范围广的动物种群数量会逐渐增多
gap:活得长的动物种群数量会逐渐增多
活的长 数量增多 搭桥
endure longer→proportion increase
这个题找gap最清楚,是假设题里少有的可以找gap的题:
前提:活动范围广的动物活得长
结论:活动范围广的动物种群数量会逐渐增多
gap:活得长的动物种群数量会逐渐增多
取反: If a characteristic tends to help species endure longer, then the proportion of that species does not increase with time---then we cant say that the proportion of species with broad ranges tends to gradually increase with time and our conclusion falls apart