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！

讲解

DS：已知9个数的平均数是43，求标准方差 1）最小的那个数是43 2）最大的那个数是43

一个数n的因子有2，3，5，n < 200，求n？ 条件1：4不是他的因子 条件2：9是他的因子

一辆火车走600 miles的路程，一般需要10h；火车中间走了一段速度20 miles的路；接下来是速度60miles的路，问速度60miles走了多久？ 条件1：速度20 miles走了3个小时 条件2：600 miles路程平均速度为56miles

一个数被10r整除，但不被10r+1整除，求r？ 条件1：这个数被25整除不被26整除 条件2：这个数被56整除不被57整除

数学考了一道，本来某一天下午两点水池剩n方水，每小时漏1/4方，每天下午一点会加进去14方，问水池剩m方的时候是星期几几点？

一个长方形长x宽y，能不能比较沿x边卷起的圆柱体体积和y边卷起圆柱体的体积？ 条件1：2x大于y 条件2：x小于3y

一个公司准备给一个地区中大于等于65，并且在当地呆的时间小于等于5年的人，发放谋谋福利，问这部分所占比例？ 条件1：该地区≥65岁的占比（某个值） 条件2：该地区呆的时间≤5年的人占比（某个值）

问x^y是否是odd？ 条件1：x是odd 条件2：可以求出来y是odd

编号1-8的蓝木板放到一个箱子里，编号1-8的红木板放到另一个。每个箱子各抽一块板，问抽到蓝木板和红木板编号一样的几率是多少？ 老师为什么不是 1/64?