【求助】问个新G的阅读题

The use of heat pumps has been held back
largely by skepticism about advertisers‘ claims that
heat pumps can provide as many as two units of
thermal energy for each unit of electrical energy
used, thus apparently contradicting the principle of
energy conservation. (43 words)

6. If the author‘s assessment of the use of heat pumps is
correct, which of the following best expresses the
lesson that advertisers should learn from this case?
(A) Do not make exaggerated claims about the
products you are trying to promote.
(B) Focus your advertising campaign on vague
analogies and veiled implications instead of
on facts.
(C) Do not use facts in your advertising that will
strain the prospective client‘s ability to
believe.
(D) Do not assume in your advertising that the
prospective clients know even the most
elementary scientific principles.
(E) Concentrate your advertising firmly on financially
relevant issues such as price discounts and
efficiency of operation.

为什么选C不选A  感觉A说的也对

up~up~同求解释~

找到这个网页，看来这篇逻辑是NO题改过来的，感觉改编后忽略了一些细节，让人很难推出是C，毕竟新文章里只有很小一部分在描述这个heat pump……
网页：http://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=1005583&highlight
ps:现在想想其实A可以排除，因为从原文中无法推出商家是否夸大了产品。这里有一个逻辑陷阱：先让人同意能量守恒定律，然后就自然而然地认为heat pump花一单位电能产生两单位热能一定是夸大了的。而考生并没有得到任何信息，能说明一单位电能就比两单位热能的能量少。

回复 3# Kimurate


    3Q~看了下原文大体明白了  顺便问一下学长，有啥好的电脑上背单词的方法没？感觉纸质版的太慢了，而且效率不是很高的说。。。

回复 4# weixc1234

额，我背单词一直用的红宝，以前在某网站上背过一个月，叫做拓词，现在好像挺火，你可以试试，每个人感觉不同，我不适合在电脑上背。。

我觉得是这样：如果是夸大的话，应该说原来1单位电能能转换0.5单位热能，而广告宣称能转换成0.7的热能，这还是可能的。但是1单位能量装换为两单位，这应该就是COMMON SENSE的问题了，也就是C中提到的fact。个人理解，欢迎大家指正~