Although fullerenes--spherical molecules made entirely of carbon--were first found in the laboratory, they have since been found in nature, formed in fissures of the rare mineral shungite. Since laboratory synthesis of fullerenes requires distinctive conditions of temperature and pressure, this discovery should give geologists a test case for evaluating hypotheses about the state of the Earth's crust at the time these naturally occurring fullerenes were formed.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument?
Confirming that the shungite genuinely contained fullerenes took careful experimentation.
Some fullerenes have also been found on the remains of a small meteorite that collided with a spacecraft.
The mineral shungite itself contains large amounts of carbon, from which the fullerenes apparently formed.
The naturally occurring fullerenes are arranged in a previously unknown crystalline structure.
Shungite itself is formed only under distinctive conditions.
我觉得这个推理结构是类比推理。
前提:在Lab和nature都发现了F这个物质
结论:我们可以通过对F在Lab合成的环境条件研究来推测Earth's crust上的F所需环境条件
本题是weaken, 因此只要说明两个F其实不一样问题就解决了。
D. The naturally occurring fullerenes are arranged in a previously unknown crystalline structure.
明确地指出F在Nature和lab两处形成的structure 明显的不一样,( previously unknown表示lab中的不是这种结构)
因此,在两者结构不一样时,我们不能将两者合成的环境继续roughly类比下去
因此,这种情况下逻辑链断裂,原结论不成立,D为正确答案。
bingo~
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论