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！

作文，感觉这个有点难找，有些地方不知道驳了算不算抬杠，请英吉老师指点一下改善一下我的思路，谢谢！

作文，感觉这个找不到更多点能驳了，请英吉老师赐教！以及马上要考试了，请问作文一定要找四个以上才稳吗？

这个题C选项为什么不可以呀 按照唐老师的方法的话只看了最后一句怎么拍出C呀 希望唐老师能回答一下

2/1 + 3/2 + 5/4 + 8/8 + 12/16 + 17/32 +…到无穷，问和是多少 6 8 10 12 16

May老师，我这个题解出来是纯算数做出来，感觉有点麻烦，有没有比较简便的方法可以做这个题呢？ 谢谢老师

金栩竹老师，这道题为什么要选择to doing 呢？to do 与to doing有哪些区别呢？感觉没怎么见过to doing 的形式。

Tina老师，这个E的those of 没有问题吗？这个指代的是哪里呢？ B哪里有问题呢？C的错误是在of嘛？

Tina老师，这个come在这里是谁的谓语呀，前面efforts 的谓语不是aimed吗？这里也只有一个连词，连词后的account不也是谓语么。

【张慧雯】老师 不好意思，不好意思🤦‍♀️ 刚刚手抖打错字了。 就是这道题，我刚重新看了一会，文章思路大致有了谱，但是这个题要问什么，自己怎么定位到原文这里，不太懂了。其他题中，像这样的，让你找最不可能的，排除东西做的题，也都不太懂🤦‍♀️

请英吉老师看一下我这个作文的思路有无什么不足，打问号的是我不太确定的，谢谢！