参与讨论：直接跟贴参与，正文第一行标明＂参与讨论＂，第二行写出选项，其后解释为什么选择该选项；参与投票：支持最佳答案，回帖＂我支持第xx楼的答案＂，支持参与讨论的同学。
Helr-CR-001
In Guatemala, archaeologists discovered that some fossils of ancient Elaphurus davidianus, an ancient deer in America, have some severe impairment on forehead of the deer. Clearly, therefore, since in the period when the ancient deer lived only the Maya used the trap that first struck the forehead of the prey, the fossils archaeologists discovered must be those of Maya’s prey.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above?
A. Some of ancient Elaphurus davidianus do have innate impairment on forehead.
B. The acid rain in Guatemala did not make additional damage on the fossils of ancient Elaphurus davidianus.
C. A great many Maya hunters, who frequently used the trap, lived in Guatemala.
D. Even if the ancient deer was struck by the trap, there would have been no treatment for it available in the period it lived.
E. The trap Maya used could not impair the preys to the extent comparable to that of archaeologist’s discovery
答案下周揭晓，欢迎大家踊跃讨论。
我先举个例子。

参与讨论
我选A！
题干：在G，考古学家发现了小E的化石，他们前额有损伤。而在那段时间，因为只有玛雅人会给他们带来这种损伤，所以发现的化石是玛雅人的猎物。
WEAKEN
A.有些小E本身前额就有这种损伤。所以不一定有这种损伤，就能说明是玛雅人造成的。削弱推理。可以留下
B.说是酸雨没有造成这种损伤。【噗..那也玛雅人没得关系啊！  选不得！
C.只说玛雅人住在G，没说前额损伤的事  不选！
D.治不了它.. 和推理的逻辑链好像扯不上关系。... 也不选
E.玛雅人造成的损伤 到不了化石上的损伤那种程度。   提到了前额损伤的事.可以留下
下面比较A和E：
A的观点是，损伤是小E天生的，与玛雅人无关。E选项则是说玛雅人造成的损伤不及化石上的损伤的那种程度。说实话..我觉得两个选项都可以削弱推理，但是感觉E选项里引入了一个损伤程度的因素，而A始终围绕小E和玛雅人在说事..所以吧。。我还是选A了！
请指教！谢谢！