【推荐1】It’s true that quite a few most respected scientific authorities have confirmed that the world is becoming hotter and hotter. There^’s also strong evidence that humans are contributing to the warming. Countless recent reports have proved the same thing. For instance, a 2010 summary about the climate science by the Royal Society noted that: The global warming over the last half - century has been caused mainly by human activity.”

You may not believe that humans could change the planet’s climate, but the basic science is well understood. Each year, billions of tons of greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere because of human activity. As has been known for years, these gases hold heat that would otherwise escape to space, wrapping the planet in an invisible blanket.

Of course, the earth’s climate has always been changing due to “natural” factors such as volcanic eruption or changes in solar, or cycles concerning the Earth’s going around the sun. According to the scientific research, however, the warming observed by now matches the pattern of warming we would expect from a build - up of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere - not the warming we would expect from other possible causes.

Even if scientists did discover another reasonable explanation for the warming recorded so far, that would give birth to a difficult question. As Robert Henson puts it: “If some newly discovered factor is to blame for the climate change, then why aren’t carbon dioxide and the other greenhouse gases producing the warming that basic physics tells us they should be?”

The only way to prove with 100% certainty that humans are responsible for global warming would be to run an experiment with two identical Earths-one with human influence and one without. That obviously isn’t possible, and so most scientists are careful not to state human influence as an absolute certainty.

【推荐3】Due to climate change and changes in land use, wildfires are predicted to rise by up to 14 percent by 2030, 30 percent by 2050 and 50 percent by the end of this century, and even areas once considered safe from major fires such as the Arctic, will “very likely” experience a major increase in burning, according to a new report by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP).

The report, Spreading like Wild fire: The Rising Threat of Extraordinary Landscape Fires, says that wildfires and climate change are “mutually worsening.” Wildfires are made more serious by climate change through increased drought, high air temperatures, low humidity (湿度), lightning, and strong winds. Meanwhile, climate change is made worse by wildfires, mostly by damaging, sensitive and carbon-rich ecosystems like rain-forests.

Wildfires can threaten people’s health and lives, pollute water, destroy crops and reduce land available to grow food. Costs of rebuilding after areas are struck by wildfires can be beyond the means of low-income countries. Wildlife, as well as natural habitats, is also rarely spared. All these slow progress towards the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

While the situation is certainly extreme, it is not yet hopeless. The publication calls on governments to adopt a new “Fire Ready Formula”, with two-thirds of spending devoted to planning, prevention, preparedness, and recovery, with one-third left for response. Currently, direct responses to wildfires typically receive over half of related expenditures (花费), while planning and prevention receive less than one percent. “We have to minimize the risk of extreme wildfires by being better prepared: invest more in fire risk reduction and shift from passive response to prevention and preparedness,” said Inger Andersen, UNEPExecutive Director.

Setting up data and science-based monitoring systems, strengthening regional and international cooperation, restoring ecosystems and thinning forests around areas where nature and human living spaces meet are just a few suggested examples of investments into prevention, preparedness and recovery.

【推荐1】The question of whether our government should promote science and technology or the liberal arts in higher education isn’t an either/or proposition (命题), although the current emphasis on preparing young Americans for STEM (science, technology, engineering, maths) - related fields can make it seem that way.

The latest congressional report acknowledge the critical importance of technical training, but also argues that the study of the humanities and social sciences must remain central components of America’s educational system at all levels. Both are critical to producing citizens who can participate effectively in our democratic society, become innovative leaders, and benefit from the spiritual enrichment that the reflection on the great ideas of mankind over time provides.

Parents and students who have invested heavily in higher education worry about graduates’ job prospects as technological advances and changes in domestic and global markets transform professions in ways that reduce wages and cut jobs. Under these circumstances, it’s national to look for what may appear to be the most “practical” way out of the problem. “Major in a subject designed to get you a job” seems the obvious answer to some, though this ignores the fact that many disciplines in the humanities characterized as “soft” often, in fact, lead to employment and success in the long run. Indeed, according to surveys, employers have expressed a preference for students who have received a broadly-based education that has taught them to write well, think critically, research creatively, and communicate easily.

Moreover, students should be prepared not just for their first job, but for their 4th and 5th jobs, as there’s little reason to doubt that people entering the workforce today will be called upon to play many different roles over the course of their careers. The ones who will do the best in this new environment will be those whose educations have prepared them to be flexible. The ability to draw upon every available tool and insight - picked up from science, arts, and technology - to solve the problems of the future, and take advantage of the opportunities that present themselves, will be helpful to them and the United States.

【推荐2】“A good book might clarify something you knew little about, transform your world view, or move you in ways you didn’t think possible. The Soul of an Octopus(章鱼)delivers on all three, ”the magazine New Scientist commented.

After writing about birds, pigs and tigers, US naturalist Sy Montgomery decided to choose these many-footed animals as the subject of her latest book, The Soul of an Octopus: a surprising exploration into the wonder of consciousness.

“Here is animal with poisonous liquid like a snake，a beak(喙)like a parrot，and ink like an old-fashioned pen. It can weigh as much as a man and extend as long as a car, yet it can pour its baggy，boneless body through an opening the size of all orange. It can change color and shape. It has a tongue covered with teeth. It can taste with its skin.” Montgomery explained to the National Geographic on why octopuses inspired her.

What Montgomery is able to show in The Soul of an Octopus is that octopuses are creatures who exhibit personality, intelligence and emotion, despite having nervous systems completely different from our own. She uses different experiments to show that they possess consciousness as well as individual personalities. For example, based on her research, she finds out that Octavia, an octopus caught in the wild, is friendly and good at multi-tasking. And Kali, another octopus，who has been living at the New England Aquarium, is playful and loves exploring.

Montgomery is a good storyteller. Through her study of, and communication with, these extraordinary creatures she shares what she learns from both science and her experiences. Her skillful writing presents facts together with personal description, which makes the book very informative but easy to read.

【推荐3】A primary school in Hangzhou said on Monday it’s pulling a sex education textbook over complaints after gaining recent international attention for both its progressive approach and its graphic content.

Controversy sparked after a mother of a second-grader at the school posted about the textbook on Sina Weibo on February 28, complaining the book contained overly-graphic illustrations of reproductive(生殖的)organs.

The book, published by Beijing Normal University, aims for students aged 6 to13. It had been used in schools for nearly a decade before the recent round of controversy.

In China, sex education often faces resistance, especially from the older generation of parents who used to tell their children that babies were picked up in streets or jumped out from rocks. China’s sex education is considered conservative and schools usually try to avoid the subject, leaving the responsibility to parents or society. Nowadays, the frank description of sexual behavior in a recently-released sex education textbook for primary school students in the city has triggered a wave of parental concern. Is the sex education textbook truly too clearly expressed?

Some people hold that the sex education book should be detailed. Sex education is an important way of teaching children knowing themselves, so we cannot ambiguous words describing the sex. On the other hand, adults see dirty things in the books while students may not. They see things in a different way and we should not judge the books from our perspective. There is no need to avoid sex in education.

Others do not agree. They think it is not wrong to describe sex in direct ways, but the sentences in the book are too rude and are even banned from our website. The wording should be more tender and beautiful in books for children.

As far as I can see, we should be more careful about the sensitive topic, sex education. Different methods should be applied to children of different age groups. We can tell more details about sex to the older children, because they can accept it smoothly, and give more pictures, or tender words to the younger ones.