扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2007E1-CR-15
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur. Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.
The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
求问A为什么不对
explanation 和 conclusion 有区别吗？
最终排掉是因为我觉得后面那个不是part of explanation 它就是全部
这样理解对吗？
感谢！！！
这个条件是用来证明结论的，因为一开始目的就很明确了。hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size的。 行文逻辑是结论 -条件-确认结论（V）
而不是先发现了一个事实，然后解释这个事实。 事实-得出一个结论 （X）
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论