资源描述
The speaker, on the topic of _, effectively casts doubt on the passage, providing the opposite evidence concerning/ about influences on/from _.Firstly, _听力结果_. Despite the content from passage that _阅读结果_, the speaker provides an alternative explanation that _听力内容_2 句_. From this case, the speaker questions the validity of the passage. Secondly, _听力结果_. According to the lecture, _听力内容 2 句_. Such information directly challenges the position of the passage that _阅读结果_.Thirdly, _听力结果_. The passage states that _阅读结果_. However, the speaker denies this point and gives the proof that _听力内容 2 句_. This is another case where the content from the passage is totally groundless.Fourthly, 听力结果 . The passage states that 阅读结果, which is actually questioned by the speaker, who proposes the proof that 听力内容 2 句 . Therefore, the side of the passage is overthrown by listening material. 听力：lecture, speaker, professor, listening material阅读：passage, reading material, author, writerRebut, refute, deny, criticize, attack, question, cast doubt onIntroductionThe speaker, on the topic of American early retirement, effectively casts doubt on the passage, providing the opposite evidence concerning technological requirement, relationship with young staffs, and working pressure. The passage, on the topic against birds method of finding direction, has been questioned by the speaker, who brings forward the contradictory proofs concerning the discovery of methanes, geographical crystals, and liquid-form water. The speaker denies the position of passage on the topic of human impacts on bird population. Meanwhile, he also provides the different evidence about influences from the extension of human habitat, agricultural development, and use of pesticide.The speaker denies the passage on the topic that . meanwhileBODY:Topic sentence 阅读 ，然而听力 。因此，听力有效的驳斥了阅读。Firstly, the zoos will lead to the decrease of animals health. Despite the content from passage that the enough food and water will guarantee the living of animals, the speaker provides an alternative explanation that although animals are protected, the provision results in the laziness. In this condition, animals will lose the opportunity of exercice and suffer from the decline of health. From this case, the speaker questions the validity of the passage. Secondly, . According to the lecture, . Such information directly challenges the position of the passage that . Thirdly, . The passage states that . However, the speaker denies this point and gives the proof that . This is another case where the content from the passage is totally groundless / unwarranted / improper / inappropriate. Fourthly, . The passage states that , which is actually questioned by the speaker, who proposes the proof that . Therefore, the side of the passage is overthrown by listening material. 1The speaker, on the topic of self-aware and self-recognition by animals, effectively casts doubt on the passage, providing the opposite evidence concerningfurther research, same routines and social response.Firstly, further research reflected that chimpanzees touch themselves frequently. Despite the content from passage that chimpanzees touched seven timesin a half-hour, the speaker provides an alternative explanation that only one of eleven chimpanzees touched themselves more often. In this condition, the mark test fail to illustrate that chimpanzees possess self-recognition. From this case, the speaker questions the validity of the passage. Secondly, chimpanzees always own the same routines. According to the lecture, the chimpanzees already touched their marked spots many times before looking at the mirror, which means this behavior has nothing to do with self-recognition. Such information directly challenges the position of the passage that itis because chimpanzees looked at their image that they touch the marked spots.Thirdly, chimpanzees possess social response that they show in the presence of another chimpanzee. The passage states that it is self-aware that leads tothe touch. However, the speaker denies this point and gives the proof that monkeys increase self grooming when seeing another monkey. This is another case where the content from the passage is totally groundless. 2The speaker, on the topic of Thomas Malthus theory, effectively casts doubt on the passage, providing the opposite evidence concerning food increase and population decrease.Firstly, the productivity of food will increase dramatically. Despite the content from passage that food production cant keep pace with population increase, the speaker provides an alternative explanation that Malthus forgot the rapid development of technology, especially to Malthuss age, will boost the output of food. New technology at that time will undoubtedly increase the efficiency of food productivity. In this condition, the food increases at a rate which cansatisfy all the people. From this case, the speaker questions the validity of the passage.Secondly, the increase of population will become stable. According to the lecture, due to the change of living standard, the population will be controlled. Besides, there are also some effective measures, such as education and birth control, giving rise to the lower population increase rate. Such information directly challenges the position of the passage that the population increases at a rate of 1,2,4,8,16, and so on.3The speaker, on the topic of working a four-day week, efficiently casts doubt on the passage that work four days a week enjoys several benefits, providing the opposite evidence concerning companys benefit, social unemployment and employees life quality.Firstly, working a four-day week policy will force the companies to spend more money. Despite the content from the passage that companies can spend 80 percent of their normal pay to the employees, the speaker provides an alternative explanation that the new policy will require companies to add workers which leads to more money on trainings, medical care. It will also need more office space and computers. From this case, the speaker questions the validity of the passage.Secondly, working four days a week cant provide more job opportunities. According to the lecture, this new policy will motivate the companies to ask employees to work overtime. Besides, companies will raise their expectation that employees can finish five-day-work in four days. Such information challenges the position of the passage that the policy will reduce unemployment rates.Finally, the life quality of individuals cant be improved through this new policy. The passage states that this option is better for individual employees, which the speaker denies and gives the proof that this option will decrease peoples job abilities. Moreover, employees who work four days a week may be substitute by five-day workers and have less chance to get promoted.4The speaker, on the topic of whether one painting was painted by Rembrandt, effectively casts doubt on the reading material, providing the opposite evidence concerning fur collar, light and shadow and wood panel.Firstly, the fur collar of the portrait was repainted. Despite the content from the passage that the luxurious fur collar is inconsistent about the white linen cap, the speaker provides an alternative explanation that the fur collar was changed by someone else hundreds years after Rembrandt, in order to make the portrait more brilliant. From this case, the speaker questions the validity of the passage.Secondly, the original work by Rembrandt enjoyed the perfect light and shadow. According to the lecture, the original color of the fur collar was the light so it is incorrect to say the womans face should appear partially in shadow. Such information directly challenges the position of the author that the dark fur collar would absorb light rather than reflect it.Finally, it is because the work was enlarged that used wood glued together. The passage states that Rembrandt never paint on panels glued together. However, the speaker refutes this point and gives the proof that people wanted this portrait to be more grand and valuable so the work was enlarged. Besides, the panel used in this painting is the same with another by Rembrandt. This is another case where the content from the passage is totally groundless.5、The speaker, on the topic of dinosaurs are not endotherms, effectively casts doubt on the reading material, providing the opposite evidence concerning polar dinosaurs, leg position and movement and bone structure.Firstly, polar dinosaurs cant maintain their temperature. Despite the content from the passage that only endotherms can be active in such cold climates, the speaker provides an alternative explanation that the dinosaur fossils found in other places are warmer than polar dinosaurs. Besides, it is impossible for polar dinosaurs to move from cold place to warm areas. From this case, the speaker questions the validity of the passage.Secondly, leg position and movement of dinosaurs are born out of their large scale. According to the lecture, it is the ability of running that makes dinosaurs legs positioned underneath their bodies. Another reason is its huge weight. Such information directly challenges the position of the author that the same legs with the modern endotherms suggest that dinosaurs were endotherms.Thirdly, the bones of dinosaurs also include structured called growsring. The passage states that haversian canals allow dinosaurs to grow quickly, which is a feature of endothermy. However, the listening material denies this point and give the proof that growsring stops dinosaurs growing. Futhermore, dinosaurs cant grow quickly in cooler areas. This is another case where the content from the passage is totally groundless.6、The speaker, on the topic of the three theories of the use of Chaco Canyon, effectively casts doubt on the reading material, providing the opposite evidence concerning the theories of residential, storage and ceremonial centers.Firstly, Chaco Canyon structures were not used for residential due to the inside of the building. Despite the content from the passage that the structures appeared similar to the apartment at Taos, New Mexicao, the speaker provides an alternative explanation that there were few fireplaces which could only afford 10 families, but the space is enough for more 100 families. From this case, the speaker questions the validity of the passage.Secondly, there is no trace to prove the storage for maize. According to the listening material, if Chaco structures were used for storing maize, then there should have lots of big containers. However, the archaeologists found no container to support this theory. Such information directly challenges the opposition of the passage that the Chaco structures were used to store food supplies.Thirdly, the pots were the trash of the structure. The passage states that the houses were used as ceremonial centers due to the discarded pots. However, the speaker denies this point and gives the proof that other materials, such as sand, stone, were found in the houses which may be the trash that not used up during the construction. Under this circumstance, pots are just one of the leaving materials for construction. This is another case where the content from the passage is totally groundless.
展开阅读全文