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！

老师好…这道CR题错选A能求解释一下么？谢谢！

请教唐瑭老师：og上的题，答案是D，选了A。不明白D为什么对，是因为最后一句的Although强调的是前半句吗？although一般强调后半句还是前半句？

老师这道题不知道该怎么解！我是这么算的 6!/3!*3!得出来的结果再乘以2，等于40，但答案是30，不知道是哪里算错了，还是我理解错了，希望老师解答！

老师图片里是作文的标题和我在规定时间内写的东西，您看看我错误找全了吗？找错的思维有没有跳跃？第一段和第二段的论证可以这样写吗？以及我每次都是三十分钟压线写完，字数也不多，请老师给我提一些思维和写作上的建议，谢谢！

老师这道题题目有点看不懂，算不到B选项，不知道是题目理解错了还是公式用错了，求讲解

老师能讲解一下这道题吗？

老师您好，这道题的题目有一点看不懂，请问是什么意思以及为什么选d？

老师您好，我想问一下这道题E为什么有利于支持文中观点？

@英吉老师，我最近在看您的录播逻辑网课，您不推荐我们回读。但是我在日常练习的时候做不到读一遍就能弄懂句间关系，或者读第一遍有时候连句子一起都不太清楚。那我们想要练就读一遍就可以了解句间关系的能力，并且用在考场的话，平时可以怎样练习呢？

老师请问这个“or”应该怎么算？