子机构
400-600-1123
logo GMAT备考资讯 答疑社区 GMAT公开课 提分课程
登录
注册

我的备考方案

获取方案

题库解析   >   推理题题型   >  
    本题由lindy提供
3763次学习

Years before the advent of plate tectonics—the widely accepted theory, developed in the mid-1960s, that holds that the major features

of Earth's surface are created by the horizontal motions of Earth's outer shell, or lithosphere—a similar theory was rejected by the geological community. In 1912, Alfred Wegener proposed, in a widely debated theory that came to be called continental drift, that Earth's continents were mobile. To most geologists today, Wegener’s The Origin of Continents and Oceans appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics theory: the horizontal mobility of pieces of Earth's crust; the essential difference between oceanic and continental crust; and a causal connection between horizontal displacements and the formation of mountain chains. Yet despite the considerable overlap between Wegener’s concepts and the later widely embraced plate tectonics theory, and despite the fact that continental drift theory presented a possible solution to the problem of the origin of mountains at a time when existing explanations were seriously in doubt, in its day Wegener’s theory was rejected by the vast majority of geologists.

Most geologists and many historians today believe that Wegener's theory was rejected because of its lack of an adequate mechanical basis. Stephen Jay Gould, for example, argues that continental drift theory was rejected because it did not explain how continents could move through an apparently oceanic floor. However, as Anthony Hallam has pointed out, many scientific phenomena, such as the ice ages, have been accepted before they could be fully explained. The most likely cause for the rejection of continental drift—a cause that hasbeen largely ignored because we consider Wegener's theory to have been validated by the theory of plate tectonics—is the nature of the evidence that was put forward to support it. Most of Wegener's evidence consisted of homol0gies—similarities of patterns and forms based on direct observations of rocks in the field, supported by the use of hammers, hand lenses, and field notebooks. In contrast, the data supporting plate tectonics were impressively geophysical—instrumental| determinations of the physical properties of Earth garnered through the use of seismographs, magnetometers, and computers.

It can be inferred from the passage that geologists today

would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements about Wegener's The Origin of Continents and Oceans?

    A. It was a worthy scientific effort that was ahead of its time.
    B. It was based on evidence that was later disproved.
    C. It was directly responsible for the acceptance of the theory of plate tectonics.
    D. It has been disproved by continental drift theory.
    E. It misrepresented how horizontal displacements cause the formation of mountain chains.

登录申友留学,查看答案及解析
答案:
A
Logical Map(结
构图) 1.Before the advent of the widely accepted theory, developed---a similar theory was rejected by the geological community. (1) 1912, Alfred Wegener (AW)proposed, in a widely debated theory ---continental drift---Earth's continents were mobile. (2)To most geologists today, AW’s( The Origin of Continents and Oceans )appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics theory... (3) Yet despite the considerable overlap between AW’S concepts and the later widely embraced plate tectonics theory... in its day AW’S theory was rejected by the vast majority of geologists. 2. Most geologists and many historians today believe--- AW’s theory was rejected because lack---an adequate mechanical basis. (1) Stephen Jay Gould, argues that continental drift theory was rejected because it did not explain how continents could move through an apparently oceanic floor. (2)However, as Anthony Hallam has pointed out, many scientific phenomena---have been accepted---before they could be fully explained. The most likely cause for the rejection of continental drift---(ignore)because we consider AW’s theory to have been validated by the theory of plate tectonics—is the nature of the evidence--supports. (3) Most of AW’s evidence consisted of homologies(similarities of patterns and forms based on direct observations of rocks in the field)... (4)In contrast, the data (supporting plate tectonics) were impressively geophysical—instrumental| determinations of the physical properties of Earth garnered... 1.在广泛被接受理论(即版块构造学)出现之前,一个相似的理论被地质学界反对。 (1)1912年,AW在广泛debated 理论(即大陆漂移说)提到:地球版块是移动的。 (2)对大多数今天的地质学家来说,AW’s “关于海洋陆地起源”是一个impressive 和精确的文件,这里面包含了一些主要的(基于版块构造学)假设...(后面有几个假设) (3)然而:尽管有重叠存在于AW’s的观点和广泛持有的版块构造理论之间,尽管大陆漂移说存在疑问;但是AW’s的理论在他的时代被大多数地质学家反对了。 2.大多数地质学家和历史学家认为:AW’s的理论被反对的原因是:缺少精确的“力学基础”。 (1)SJ 争论:大陆漂移说被反对是以为它不能解释版块能够移动通过一个透明的海洋层。 (2)然而:AH指出:许多科学现象被接受是在它们能够被完全解释清楚之前。反对版块漂移说最可能的原因是(先前忽略掉的)我们考虑到AW’s理论被版块构造学支持确认,一直都是我们用来支持它的证据。 (3)大多数AW’s证据是由同源性组成的(基于在岩石观察领域类型,形式) (4)对比而言:支持版块构造的数据是很偏地质物理的... 推理题; (4)回文定位到这句话:To most geologists today, AW’s( The Origin of Continents and Oceans )appears an impressive and prescient document, containing several of the essential presumptions underlying plate tectonics theory...(对大多数今天的地质学家来说,AW’s “关于海洋陆地起源”是一个impressive 和精确的文件,这里面包含了一些主要的(基于版块构造学)假设...(后面有几个假设)) A. It was a worthy scientific effort that was ahead of its time.值得研究,早于他的时代(文章里面说了,这是一个很好的文件,包含了很多假设的基础,所以可以留下,都是一些假设的基础了,就近能推出ahead of its time) B. later disproved.这不geologists today的观点,是他那个时代的人反对;并且不属于我定位的层次。 C.acceptance of the theory of plate tectonics.文章没有提到 D. It has been disproved by continental drift theory. 层次没有提到;作者是认可他好的,所以disproved也有问题。 E. It misrepresented how horizontal displacements cause the formation of mountain chains.层次没提到

参与讨论

提交
热门题目
申友gmat小助手

添加官方小助手微信
了解更多GMAT考试与咨询

吉祥物小蜜蜂
联系申友 全国免费咨询热线:400-600-1123

友情链接: 申友雅思 | 申友留学 | 申友GMAT官方微博 | 申友GMAT官方知乎机构账号

Copyright © 2020 All Right Reserved 申友教育 版权所有 沪ICP备17005516号-4 免责声明