That 1.8% cannot be true; otherwise this rate would have been constant


所有跟贴·加跟贴·新语丝读书论坛

送交者: Amsel 于 2008-03-15, 14:50:37:

回答: You don't need to believe me and I don't need to convince you. 由 Amsel 于 2008-03-15, 14:44:49:

for over ten years from 1990s. Moreover a constant 1.8% is also inconsistent with the decrease of pupil number.



所有跟贴:


加跟贴

笔名: 密码: 注册笔名请按这里

标题:

内容: (BBCode使用说明