题目
Environmentalist: The commissioner of the Fish and Game Authority would have the public believe that increases in the number of marine fish caught demonstrate that this resource is no longer endangered. This is a specious argument, as unsound as it would be to assert that the ever-increasing rate at which rain forests are being cut down demonstrates a lack of danger to that resource. The real cause of the increased fish-catch is a greater efficiency in using technologies that deplete resources.
The environmentalist’s statements, if true, best support which of the following as a conclusion?
选项
A.The use of technology is the reason for the increasing encroachment of people on nature.
B.It is possible to determine how many fish are in the sea in some way other than by catching fish.
C.The proportion of marine fish that are caught is as high as the proportion of rain forest trees that are cut down each year.
D.Modern technologies waste resources by catching inedible fish.
E.Marine fish continue to be an endangered resource.
解析
环保主义者:渔业和狩猎管理局局长想让公众相信,海洋鱼类捕获量的增加表明这种资源不再濒危。这是一个似是而非的论点,就像断言热带雨林被砍伐的速度不断加快表明该资源没有危险一样不合理。鱼类捕获量增加的真正原因是利用消耗资源的技术的效率提高了。
- 环保主义者反驳了渔业和狩猎管理局局长认为海洋鱼类捕获量增加意味着其不再濒危的观点,提出鱼类捕获量增加是因为利用消耗资源技术的效率提高了,暗示海洋鱼类实际上仍然处于濒危状态。
- **正确答案方向**应该是与海洋鱼类实际上依旧濒危这一观点相契合或者能由此合理推断出的表述。
- **A选项**:技术的使用是人类对自然日益侵占的原因。该选项讨论的是人类对自然的侵占原因,与海洋鱼类是否濒危这一核心话题毫无关联,无法从题干信息推出该结论,不符合要求。
- **B选项**:可以通过捕鱼以外的某种方式确定海里有多少鱼。题干主要围绕鱼类捕获量增加的原因以及海洋鱼类是否濒危展开,而此选项关于确定鱼数量的方式,与核心论点无关,不能作为结论被支持,不符合要求。
- **C选项**:每年被捕捞的海洋鱼类的比例与每年被砍伐的雨林树木的比例一样高。题干重点并非比较海洋鱼类捕捞比例和雨林树木砍伐比例,与核心论述无关,不能由题干推出,不符合要求。
- **D选项**:现代技术通过捕捞不可食用的鱼来浪费资源。题干未提及捕捞不可食用的鱼以及浪费资源的相关内容,偏离核心话题,不能作为结论,不符合要求。
- **E选项**:海洋鱼类仍然是一种濒危资源。根据环保主义者对渔业和狩猎管理局局长观点的反驳,指出鱼类捕获量增加是因为技术效率提高而非资源不濒危,所以可以合理推断出海洋鱼类依旧是濒危资源,符合核心论点及正确答案方向。
### 答案
E选项。