2. 职称英语
  3. Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of hydrocarbon

Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of hydrocarbon

游客2025-02-25  7
问题 Most geologists believe oil results from chemical transformations of hydrocarbons derived from organisms buried under ancient seas. Suppose, instead, that oil actually results from bacterial action on other complex hydrocarbons that are trapped within the earth. As is well known, the volume of these hydrocarbons exceeds that of buried organisms. Therefore, our oil reserves would be greater than most geologists believe.
Which of the following, if true, gives the strongest sup-port to the argument above about our oil reserves?
选项 A、Most geologists think optimistically about the earth’s reserves of oil.
B、Most geologists have performed accurate chemical analyses on previously discovered oil reserves.
C、Ancient seas are buried within the earth at many places where fossils are abundant.
D、The only bacteria yet found in oil reserves could have leaked down drill holes from surface contaminants.
E、Chemical transformations reduce the volume of buried hydrocarbons derived from organisms by roughly the same proportion as bacterial action reduces the volume of other complex hydrocarbons.
答案 E
解析 What new information, if added to the argument would strengthen it?
The argument sets forth a novel hypothesis at out how oil reserves are created. That is, oil reserves are created through bacterial action on complex hydrocarbons within the earth rather than through chemical transformation of hydrocarbons derived from organisms buried under ancient seas.
The argument notes that the volume of the hydrocarbons that bacteria transform to yield oil is greater than the volume of hydrocarbons derived from the buried organisms and concludes that total oil reserves are greater than most geologists believe them to be.
A    This suggests that most geologists might, if anything, be inclined to overestimate oil reserves. However, this consideration has little bearing on the chemical origin of oil or how much oil may remain buried in  the earth.
B    This does not tell us whether the chemical analyses can identify whether the oil originated from hydrocarbons derived from buried organisms.
C    The existence of buried ancient seas has little, if any, relevance to the argument. This choice fails to provide evidence that by itself would help decide whether the hypothesized bacterial origin of oil actually supports the inference that oil reserves are greater that in is currently assumed.
D    This suggests that bacteria have been found in some oil reserves; the potential importance of this discovery is unclear.
E    Correct. This strengthens the argument: if it is true, then the greater abundance of complex hydrocarbons from which it is hypothesized that oil can be derived through bacterial action would predict much larger oil reserves than exist under most geologists’ current predictions.
The correct answer is E.
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3971630.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)