2011新gre写作：逻辑问题分析论证整理_GRE写作

2011新gre写作：逻辑问题分析论证整理

　　17. If so， even though 3 percent more accidents occurred after the change， the authors argument that changing the speed limit increases danger for drivers would be seriously weakened. 18.In addition， while it is true that many voters change their minds several times before voting， and that some remain undecided until entering the voting booth， this is not true of everyone.

　　19 Moreover， the author fails to consider and rule out other factors that might account for proportional decreases in spending on food.

　　20. Without knowing the extent and nature of the damage resulting from the bad publicity or the reason for the violation， we cannot accept the authors conclusion.

　　21 The authors proposal is inconsistent with the authors conclusion about the consequences of adopting an ethics code.

　　22. To begin with， the author fails to consider health threats posed by incinerating trash.

　　23. The authors conclusion that switching to incineration would be more salutary for public health would be seriously undermined.

　　24. However， this is not necessarily the case.

　　25.The authors implicit claim that incinerators are economically advantageous to landfills is poorly supported.

　　26. Consequently， unless the author can demonstrate that the city will incur expenses that are not covered by the increased revenues from these projects， the authors concern about these issues is unfounded.