Archaeology as a profession faces two major problems. First, it is the poorest of the poor. Only paltry sums are available for excavating and even less is available for publishing the results (5) and preserving the sites once excavated. Yet archaeologists deal with priceless objects every day. Second, there is the problem of illegal excavation, resulting in museum-quality pieces being sold to the highest bidder. (10) Iwould like to make an outrageous suggestion that would at one stroke provide funds for archaeology and reduce the amount of illegal digging. Iwould propose that scientific archaeological expeditions and governmental (15) authorities sell excavated artifacts on the open market. Such sales would provide substantial funds for the excavation and preservation of archaeological sites and the publication of results. At the same time, they would break the illegal (20) excavator's grip on the market, thereby decreasing the inducement to engage in illegal activities. You might object that professionals excavate to acquire knowledge, not money. Moreover, ancient artifacts are part of our global cultural heritage, (25) which should be available for all to appreciate, not sold to the highest bidder. Iagree. Sell nothing that has unique artistic merit or scientific value. But, you might reply, everything that comes out of the ground has scientific value. Here we part company. (30) Theoretically, you may be correct in claiming that every artifact has potential scientific value. Practically, you are wrong. I refer to the thousands of pottery vessels and ancient lamps that are essentially duplicates of (35) one another. In one small excavation in Cyprus, archaeologists recently uncovered 2,000 virtually indistinguishable small jugs in a single courtyard. Even precious royal seal impressions known as I'melekh handles have been found in abundance (40) —more than 4,000 examples so far. The basements of museums are simply not large enough to store the artifacts that are likely to be discovered in the future. There is not enough money even to catalog the finds; as a result, they 368 (45) cannot be found again and become as inaccessible as if they had never been discovered. Indeed, with the help of a computer, sold artifacts could be more accessible than are the pieces stored in bulging museum basements. Prior to sale, each could be (50) photographed and the list of the purchasers could be maintained on the computer. A purchaser could even be required to agree to return the piece if it should become needed for scientific purposes. It would be unrealistic to suggest that illegal (55) digging would stop if artifacts were sold on the open market. But the demand for the clandestine product would be substantially reduced. Who would want an unmarked pot when another was available whose provenance was known, and that was dated (60) stratigraphically by the professional archaeologist who excavated it? The primary purpose of the passage is to propose (A) an alternative to museum display of artifacts (B) a way to curb illegal digging while benefiting the archaeological profession (C) a wayto distinguish artifacts with scientific value from those that have no such value (D) the governmental regulation of archaeological sites (E) a new system for cataloging duplicate artifacts

请问当遇到这种完全看不懂不明白逻辑关系的题怎么办？可以帮忙分析一下这篇文章吗

011我是把去银行放进了第一个、第二个、第三个然后分别去算它的可能性，我算出来是10种诶，不太懂为什么答案是12种

老师这个题我不知道为啥每个人扔硬币的组合是2^3...我觉得应该是2*3=6种。然后它里面说P扔硬币的结果没有和任何一个人相同有8*7*7种我也不是很明白。。?

041我没看懂答案，为什么条件2可以确定b一定是整数呀

请金老师帮忙回答下 七龙珠E卷 34 考点： 并列，时态 我自己选的A， 理由：划线外are often dragged under and drowned的 主语that指的就是seabirds， 语义，并列都符合，虽然用的是encountered但是感觉可以接受 给出的答案C，说长线 devastating 海鸟 are often dragged and drowned. 感觉从修饰结构能接受，但是句意不是很理解

请金老师帮忙回答，七龙珠E卷的 32题 考点： 修饰，分号与逗号 读完句子直间排除了BCD， 保留了A，E,做题时没有注意到分号， 是否因为it appears darker是有完整主谓，E不能直接逗号接从而排除

七龙珠E卷的16题 请金老师帮忙解答： 可以看出考点：修饰，指代，时态 根据副词修饰形容词排除了AB， CDE选项，我能看出考点，但是缺选不对答案，比如我知道考点是指代，但是我无法判断percentage of it这个加上到底好不好， 再比如我能注意到 estimated that, 会认为需要用将来式，但是做题的时候感觉读C更顺，而选择C 实际做题的时候，应该怎么结合看出来的考点提高正确率呢？

请问什么时候用从句，什么时候用svo+doing呢？

请问"and consequently"的意思和作用与“and thus" 或“and also"是一样的嘛

since Robert boyle是什么意思怎么感觉怪怪的？所以这道题就是关注语义形式并列而不是看功能并列嘛？还有就是and also到底可不可以用？