Years before the advent of plate tectonics―the widely accepted theory, developed in the mid-1960's, the 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 solid 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 has been 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 homologies―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. 我选了E considerable overlap前面是despite XXX说明这个是个成就，他和后面的反对W的观点的事情是相反的。所以感觉D说用这个词的目的是解释为啥W理论。请老师辨析DE！谢谢！

请唐塘老师分析一下这道题，谢谢

想问下may老师什么时候变化率的计算公式 什么时候分母是被减数，什么时候是减数 像这题求时间的变化率分母是距离也就是被减数，但是对于其他年增长之类变化率的分母就是减数，想知道这个区别，谢谢老师

请文静老师解答：老师我读主旨大概总结为：各个政府开出优惠政策来吸引商家只会两败俱伤，这样不会创造更多的就业岗位，只会影响工作的布局。觉得B很核心的反应了文章主旨。因为从文章主旨上读出这样的行为各个政府都不受益只是影响工作布局罢了，那为什么政府还要重点关注E里竞争者开的条件呢？

老师您在讲课的时候把总数设为了a,将有副作用设为y,将有疗效设为了x,那通过条件（1）就可以知道有疗效为0.9a,没有疗效为0.1a,但是是怎么得出“没疗效有副作用”也为0.1a从而结合题设把y用a的式子表示的呢？感觉只能得出T这一栏里“没有疗效”的总数为0.1a哇

想问下may老师这题怎么做

想问下may老师怎么做

想问下may老师怎么做

[急] 这题七龙珠答案给的C，但是这里的contemporary只能是形容词或者名词，是不是不能直接接在名词后面用？如果这是个硬伤的话，E会不会更好一些呢？

[急] 请问May老师，这里通过连接下面圆的圆心，是不是是不是可以得到r跟b的直接关系，这样选A是不是就可以了呢？

当时老师讲的答案是A。statement 1 sufficient；statement 2 not sufficient。但是我现在不太理解了，觉得答案有些问题，能不能再详细的讲一下这道题怎么做？谢谢！