Re: [請益] TPO15 MASS EXTINCTIONS

看板TOEFL_iBT (TOEFL_iBT托福)作者v9290026 (JS)時間14年前 (2011/10/05 12:38)推噓0(0推 0噓 0→)

留言0則, 0人參與討論串2/2 (看更多)

※ 引述《Choriscol (粹雷戈)》之銘言： : Paragraph 7: An asteroid of this size would be expected to leave an immense : crater, even if the asteroid itself was disintegrated by the impact. The : intense heat of the impact would produce heat-shocked quartz in many types of : rock. Also, large blocks thrown aside by the impact would form secondary : craters surrounding the main crater. To date, several such secondary craters : have been found along Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula, and heat-shocked quartz has : been found both in Mexico and in Haiti. A location called Chicxulub, along : the Yucatan coast, has been suggested as the primary impact site. : 12. What is the purpose of paragraph 7 in the passage? : ○It proposes a decisive new test of the Alvarez hypothesis. : ○It presents additional supporting evidence for the Alvarez hypothesis. : ○It explains why evidence relating to the Alvarez hypothesis is hard to find. : ○It shows how recent evidence has raised doubts about the Alvarez hypothesis : 黃金閱讀的答案是C，但TPO內給的答案是B，我自己是選B : 有請強者指教正確答案，謝謝 Orz 這題我也是選擇B- 對於Alvarez理論提供了額外的支持證據[*若沒說出其他的證據則此選項措] C選項的核心是-該段解釋了發現關於Alvarez理論的證據有多困難[*若沒有說明有多困難則此選項錯] 思路: 1.作者在上一段最後的結語即說明: This iridium anomaly offers strong support for the Alvarez hypotheis even though no asteroid itself has ever been recovered. 作者的態度是:即使沒有直接的隕石被發現，那些iridum元素的異常對Alvarez理論提供了強烈的支持---這邊就已經基本上否決掉C選項了，因為這邊已經算有證據了 2.好吧，即然沒辦法直接發現隕石(因為可能在撞擊中分解了)，如果真的有那樣(大的)size的隕石撞擊了地球，除了上一段所說的有I元素的異常(證據1)外，應該可以預期會留下很大的隕石坑吧!(證據2)，如果沒有證據2的話此段就變成是質疑 Alvarez理論(不過通常會先來個語氣詞之類的)，反之則是提供額外證據!!果其不然，作者啪啦啪啦的說在XXX發現了primary impact site(文中還說了一個secondary crater的不重要概念在此跳過) 因為上述思路，我選擇B選項，而非說明發現支持證據有多困難的選項C PS 有些人看太快有可能把C選項想成 "發現(隕石)的證據有多困難" 恩，沒錯，該段就是在說明隕石都分解掉了，只有剩下隕石坑，選他! 其實題目問的是支持整個理論的證據唷^^~ 煩請指教 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 60.245.111.200