Everybody hates rats (big mice). But in the earthquake capitals of the world — Japan, Los Angeles, Turkey — rats will soon be man’s best friends.
What happens after an earthquake? We send in rescue dogs. Why? Because they can smell people. Dogs save lives. They help rescuers to find living people. But dogs are big and they can’t get into small spaces. So now a new research project is using a smaller animal to save lives: the rat.
How does it work? First, the rat is trained to smell people. When this happens, the rat’s brain gives a signal (信号)．This is sent to a small radio on its back, and then the rescuers follow the radio signals. When the rat’s brain activity jumps, the rescuers know that someone is alive. The rat has smelled that person.
Although there are already robots which can do this job, rats are better. Christian Linster at Cornell University, New York, says, “Robots’ noses don’t work well when there are other smells around. Rats are good at that.” Rats can also see in the dark. They are cheaper and quicker to train than dogs, and unlike robots, they don't need electricity!
The “rat project” is not finished, but Julie Ryan of International Rescue Organization in Scotland says, “It would be wonderful. A rat could get into spaces we couldn’t get to, and a rat would get out if it wasn't safe.” Perhaps for the first time in history, people will be happy to see a rat in a building (but only after an earthquake, of course)．
1. Why will rats become man’s best friends in the world earthquake capitals?| A．Because they can take the place of man's rescue jobs. |
| B．Because they can find the position of people alive who are trapped in buildings. |
| C．Because they can serve as food for people alive who are trapped in buildings. |
| D．Because they can get into small spaces. |
| A．the noise made by the rat | B．the rat’s unusual behavior |
| C．the signal sent by the radio on the rat's back | D．the smell given off by the person |
| A．They are more lovely than other animals. |
| B．They are less expensive to train than dogs. |
| C．They don't need electricity. |
| D．They are small and can get into small places. |
| A．At present rats have taken the place of dogs in searching for people. |
| B．The “rat project” has been completed. |
| C．People are now happy to see a rat in a building. |
| D．Now people still use dogs and robots in performing rescues. |
相似题推荐
【推荐1】Sea urchins (海胆) are small creatures, but what’s really remarkable about them is that they eat anything that happens to float by. They have really sharp teeth they use to rid rocks of algae (海澡), which makes them pretty valuable especially in places like Hawaii where algae are threatening the coral reefs. In the summer of 2019, 500,000 of them were used to deal with the algae.
The problem started when non-native algae were introduced to the ecosystem of Kane’ohe Bay in the 1970s. Because they had no enemies, they ended up taking over the bay, according to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The algae blocked sunlight from reaching the coral, which in turn affected the local fish because they changed the chemistry of the water.
That's when the NMFS turned to sea urchins that loved to devour the algae. But they had to grow to the size of a cherry tomato before they could be used. Since 2011, sea urchins have been grown and used to handle the algae problem. Some of the funds are available due to an unfortunate incident.
In 2005, a ship was grounded on a shallow reef near Kane’ohe Bay. When the ship was removed, 20 acres of reefs have been damaged. When there is environmental damage, the NMFS and other agencies receive funds from the wrongdoers and the funds are used to restore the damage. Some funds were spent on other projects like the sea urchins.When they are large enough, divers carefully place them on the reef.
Algae isn’t the only thing that threatens the coral reefs. Climate change and the effects of fishing and tourism in the area also endanger the coral reefs. But turning to sea urchins instead of man-made solutions seems like the best way to go.
1. Why are sea urchins regarded as outstanding creatures?| A．They are tiny but have teeth. | B．They can keep the ocean clean. |
| C．They are useful in removing algae. | D．They grow on coral reefs with algae. |
| A．They helped the coral reefs to survive. | B．They spread to every corner of the bay. |
| C．They didn’t fit in with the new surroundings. | D．They fought against other species to get food. |
| A．Eat. | B．Block. | C．Tease. | D．Attract. |
| A．Relying on humans’ solutions. | B．Banning fishing and tourism. |
| C．Employing divers to handle algae. | D．Letting nature take care of nature. |
【推荐2】If the eyes are the romantic’s window into the soul, then the teeth are an anthropologist’s (人类学家) door to the stomach.
In a study published last month in the journal Science, Peter Ungar of the University of Arkansas and his partner, Matt Sponheimer of the University of Colorado, US, examined the teeth of our early human ancestors to find out what they were really eating.
They already knew that different foods cause different marks on teeth. Some cause scratches, while others cause pits (坑).The carbon left on teeth by different foods is also different. Tropical grasses, for example, leave one kind of carbon, but trees leave another kind because they photosynthesized (光合作用) differently.
Traditionally, scientists had looked at the size and shape of teeth and skulls (头骨) to figure out what early humans ate. Big flat teeth were taken to be signs that they ate nuts and seeds, while hard and sharp teeth seemed good for cutting meat and leaves. But this was proven wrong.
The best example was the Paranthropus (傍人), one of our close cousins, some of which lived in eastern Africa. Scientists used to believe Paranthropus ate nuts and seeds because they had big crests(突起) on their skulls, suggesting they had large chewing muscles and big teeth. If this had been true, their teeth should have been covered with pits like the surface of the moon. They would also have had a particular type of carbon on their teeth that typically comes from tree products, such as nuts and seeds.
However, when the two scientists studied the Paranthroupus, it turned out to have none of these characteristics. The teeth had a different kind of carbon, and were covered with scratches, not pits. This suggests they probably ate grass, not nuts and fruit stones. It was the exact opposite of what people had expected to find.
Carbon “foodprints” give us a completely new and different insight into what different species ate and the different environments they lived in. If a certain species had the kind of carbon on its teeth that came from grasses, it probably lived in a tropical grassland, for example.
1. The underlined sentence in Paragraph 1 probably means that anthropologists can _____.| A．know the structure of human stomachs by studying their teeth. |
| B．find out the diet of early humans by studying their teeth |
| C．learn whether humans were healthy by looking at their teeth |
| D．get the most useful information about humans from their teeth |
| A．Scratches on teeth are caused by eating nuts or seeds. |
| B．Pits on teeth are caused by eating grass or leaves. |
| C．Early humans with hard and sharp teeth ate meat and leaves. |
| D．Different foods leave different marks and carbon on teeth. |
| A．they were one of our close cousins living in eastern Africa |
| B．living environment makes a difference to skull structure |
| C．they had different eating habits from other humans |
| D．the size and shape of teeth don’t show accurately what early humans ate |
A． | B． |
C． | D． |
【推荐3】Cetaceans(鲸目动物) communicate through sound to find food and to interact socially. Their sounds vary between species and within communities. The long-finned pilot whales can mimic (模仿) artificial noise, but nobody had previously recorded them. A new study, however, found overlap in the cetacean sound book.
Pilot whales and orcas(虎鲸)，the two largest species of cetaceans, are often seen in the same environments and are similar sizes, and both live in social groups with strong union, says Charlotte Cure, a researcher at CEREMA Lab in France, who was not involved in the study. Orcas compete for food with long-finned pilot whales and are potentially their predators.
Evidence from orca stomachs shows they do occasionally eat pilot whales. But pilot whales can mob(成群田住) and chase them away, the only cetaceans seen defending themselves from the strong enemies in this way.
Mimicry could serve as additional defense; “One assumption is that if they use similar sounds, they may not be recognized as prey," Erbe says. Pilot whales eating orcas' food remains might go unnoticed if they use orca-like calls. “This is all underwater," she adds, “so these animals rely on sound for detecting their prey and predators.”Long-finned pilot whales have shown an ability to distinguish between orca calls with different meanings; Cure suggests that instead of tricking orcas, the callers could instead be presenting a new orca sound to other group members.
Additional work would confirm whether mimicry is actually occurring. Researchers could pair their listening data with direct observations of the animals' interactions in the wild or perhaps even play orca sounds and watch the whales' reactions.
But if a future experiment used predatory sounds, it would need to be done. very carefully.“A reaction to a predator can be very strong," Cure says.“In some protected areas, you are not allowed to do more than two predatory playbacks per year."
1. Which of the following is NOT shared by the pilot whales and orcas?| A．They communicate through sound. |
| B．They often live in the same environments. |
| C．They can defend themselves through mimicry. |
| D．They always live together with other group members. |
| A．The pilot whales mimic the sounds to detect their prey. |
| B．The pilot whales only mimic one kind of the sounds of the orcas. |
| C．The pilot whales can pretend to be orcas to share the food remains. |
| D．The pilot whales can distinguish different meanings of orca calls to trick them. |
| A．By observing the whales from the distance. |
| B．By mimicking the sounds in the experiment. |
| C．By analyzing the data from the cetacean sound book. |
| D．By listening or playing the sounds and watching the whales' reactions. |
| A．Pilot Whales: Copy Orca Calls | B．How Orcas Mimic Pilot Whale Calls |
| C．How Pilot Whales Defend Themselves | D．Orcas and Pilot Whales: Predators and Prey |
【推荐1】Earthworms don’t move fast. But humans can accelerate the worms’ spread. Fishermen often use invasive(蔓延性的) earthworms to catch fish. Many have introduced invasive earthworms to rivers, streams and lakes previously unexposed to these animals. Gardeners who use earthworms to make their soil rich may unknowingly introduce invasive ones. The worms even give rides in the mud on wheels, potted plants and road materials shipped around the nation.
But they’re not everywhere yet. In the Great Lakes region, “20 percent of the land is earthworm-free,” says Cindy Hale, a research biologist. Of the remaining 80 percent of land, half of the land has fewer than two earthworm species-meaning there isn’t yet too much impact on the ecosystem, she explains. For these regions, she says, now is the time to take action. According to Hale, educating the public, especially fishermen, is one approach to stopping the spread of invasive earthworms. Identifying which lands are currently earthworm-free is another.
Ryan Hueffmeier, a program coordinator for Great Lakes Worm Watch, has been working on a model that will help create large maps of areas with minimal(最小的) or no damage from earthworms. Ultimately, landowners can use it to identify earthworm activity on their property. once identified, lands with minimal or no earthworm damage should be protected.
But scientists suspect that once invasive earthworms arrive they can’t be removed. And even if all could be, affected forests might never return to the way they were. “It’s very much a story of learning to live with them,” concludes Lee Frelich of the University of Minnesota’s Center for Forest Ecology.
Forest ecologists have called earthworms “ecosystem engineers” because they can change or create habitats that otherwise would not be present. Whether this is a good thing depends on the situation.
“What the earthworms do and how we value it is what really matters.” said Hale. “In one place-farm fields or gardens-we really like European earthworms and what they do, so we consider them good. In native hardwood forests, we really don’t like what they do-so we consider them bad. You really have to understand how an organism(微生物) affects an ecosystem. Things aren’t black and white.”
1. Why are fishermen and gardeners mentioned in the first paragraph?| A．To attract more people to fishing and gardening. |
| B．To introduce different uses of invasive earthworms. |
| C．To stress the importance of invasive earthworms to humans. |
| D．To show humans’ effect on the spread of invasive earthworms. |
| A．Finding out areas free of earthworms. |
| B．Extending a ban on the fishing industry. |
| C．Making maps of areas with most earthworms. |
| D．Informing the public of different earthworm species. |
| A．Objective. | B．Positive. |
| C．Ambiguous. | D．Doubtful. |
| A．A biology textbook. | B．An official report. |
| C．A science magazine. | D．A research paper. |
【推荐2】The age of adulthood is by definition arbitrary. If everyone matured at the same, fixed rate, it wouldn’t be a human process. Indeed, maturation happens at varying speeds across different categories within the same individual, so I’d say I was easily old enough to vote at 16, but nobody should have given me a credit card until I was 32, and I’ve got the county court judgment to prove it.
However, we broadly agree that there’s a difference between a child and an adult, even if we might argue about the transition point. So the political theorist David Runciman’s view that six-year-olds should be allowed to vote goes against any standard argument about the age of civic responsibility. Nobody would say that a six-year-old could be held criminally responsible, could be sent to war, could be capable of consent, could be given responsibility for anything. So allowing them the vote—along with, unavoidably, seven-year-olds who are even sillier, if anything—is quite an amusing proposal.
Runciman’s argument is that this is the only way to rebalance political life, which is currently twisted in favor of the old, who don’t (he added) ever need to demonstrate mental capacity, even long after they’ve lost it.
The first part of his case is self-evident: pensions are protected while children’s centers are closed, concepts such as sovereignty (最高权威) are prioritized over the far more urgent business of the future: climate change. Nostalgia (怀念) for a past the young wouldn’t even recognize plays a central role, which is completely unfair.
Most of the arguments against giving six-year-olds a vote are that children would end up voting for something damaging and chaotic, if someone made unrealistic promises to them, which could never be realized. Well, it’s not children’s fault.
Having said that, children do tend towards the progressive, having a natural sense of justice (which kicks in at the age of six months, psychologists have shown, by creating scenes of great unfairness to babies, and making them cry) and an underdeveloped sense of self-interest. My kid, when he was six, made quite a forceful case against private property, on the basis that, since everybody needed a house, they shouldn’t cost money, because nobody would want anyone else not to have one. Also, food should be free. It was a kind of pre-Marx communism, where you limit the coverage of the market to only those things that you wouldn’t mind someone else not having.
On that particular day, when we were registered as voters, my kid was quite far to the left of me, but in the normal run of things, we’re united, which brings us to the point of the problem: children obey you on almost nothing, but they do seem to believe in your politics until they’re adolescent. So giving kids the vote is really just a way of giving parents extra votes. And what can stop us having even more children, once there’s so much enfranchisement (选举权) in it for us?
Now, if parents could be trusted to use their influence wisely, and hammer into children the politics it will take to assure a better future, then I wouldn’t necessarily have a problem with that, apart from, obviously, that culture is already wildly twisted towards parents, and I can imagine a few non-parents boiling with fierce anger. But that’s not worth talking about anyway, because parents can’t be trusted, otherwise we’d all already vote Green(绿党).
In short: no, six-year-olds should not get the vote; but while we’re here, if any votes come up in the near future, which will have an impact on the next five decades of British political life, alongside EU migrants, 16-year-olds certainly should be enfranchised.
1. The author refers to his age of adulthood to prove that ________.| A．certain rights are granted at different stages of life |
| B．there’s a common standard for the age of adulthood |
| C．people mature at different rates in various aspects |
| D．a credit card is more difficult to get than the vote |
| A．they believe children are far from mature in many ways |
| B．they are uncertain whether children can assume responsibility |
| C．they know the age to get the vote is not to be questioned |
| D．they don’t think a child can grow into adulthood earlier |
| A．Public ignorance of children’s abilities. | B．Inequalities of opportunity. |
| C．A cultural preference for the old. | D．The imbalance in political life. |
| A．children are in favor of a just society and tend to be idealistic |
| B．children are innocent and don’t want to be involved in politics |
| C．children are simple-minded and can fall for an adult’s trick |
| D．children are good-natured and like to help people in need |
| A．twisted culture | B．parents’ objections | C．misuse of rights | D．unusual maturation |
| A．There is a difference between adults and children. |
| B．Allowing children the vote is not altogether absurd. |
| C．The definition of adulthood is quite controversial. |
| D．Parents should introduce politics to their children. |
【推荐3】China has taken new measures to boost new-energy vehicle (NEV) and home appliance consumption. On June 6, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Ecological Environment and the Ministry of Commerce jointly released a guideline. It aims to upgrade the country’s consumption and form a strong domestic market in 2020.
According to the guideline, the cost of NEV production will be largely lowered and the research of a new generation of NEV batteries will be accelerated. Local governments are strictly banned from imposing any limit on the consumption and use of NEVs. Places where the limits exist should call them off. The guideline also encourages local governments to subsidize (补贴) the purchase of first NEVs of car-free families and reduce parking fees for NEVs. In this way, the move would help meet the demand for millions of vehicles in cities across the country, analysts say.
Amid the flat market in China’s auto industry, “methods to boost consumption in the auto market are still being rolled out in first-tier cities such as Beijing and Shanghai,” said Cui Dongshu, secretary-general of the China Passenger Car Association.
Some netizens held that the measures could be difficult to carry out in metropolises due to traffic pressure. Cui responded that “the traffic problems could be eased by upgrading the traffic management systems.” Cities like Beijing and Shanghai should address traffic problems in different areas based on their different levels of congestion (堵塞) through corresponding driving restrictions. The restrictions on NEVs could also be eased in some far-reaching areas in the cities, he explained.
China saw strong and healthy sales growth of NEVs in the first four months this year with 360, 000 NEVs sold, jumping by 59.8 percent from the same period a year earlier. The market could see a new round of increases under the efforts, according to industry experts.
1. Where can we most probably read the passage?| A．In a newspaper. | B．In a car magazine. |
| C．In a guideline book. | D．In an advertisement. |
| A．To increase home consumption. |
| B．To boost overseas consumption. |
| C．To occupy a powerful overseas market. |
| D．To build up a powerful market home and abroad. |
| A．No parking fees are allowed for NEVs. |
| B．The research of new NEV batteries will be sped up. |
| C．Families can be subsidized when buying their first NEVs. |
| D．Local governments have no right to monitor the use of NEVs. |
| A．Useless. | B．Successful. | C．Practical. | D．Creative. |
【推荐1】Friendly doctors are “bad for their patients’ health”, researchers have warned as a new study revealed two thirds of young doctors struggle to be truthful with patients they like.
Blurring (使……模糊) the lines between social and professional relationships can affect the level of care offered and prevent patients from being honest about important side effects.
“Doctors should avoid adding patients as friends on Facebook, they should not hug or allow patients to call them by their first names.” regulators have warned. “Those who break the boundaries will face some punishment.”
It comes as a survey of 338 oncologists (肿瘤科医生) under the age of 40, found 59 per cent said they found it difficult to tell the truth to those patients they liked. Sixty per cent of respondents said if doctors felt too close to their patients, it could prevent them from making objective decisions about a person’s care.
Lesley Fallowfield, of Brighton and Sussex Medical School, said: “Oncology is a profession that can be enormously rewarding but is filled with many challenges. Young oncologists have to master dealing with anxious patients who are facing a life-threatening disease; conveying the true prognosis (预后); discussing the complexity of modern treatments; and explaining the unavailability of some drugs, the side-effects of treatment, and likely treatment aims.”
But she said, “Those doctors who have entered the profession in the age of the ‘Internet world’are more likely to fall victim to blurring the professional boundaries with patients.”
She said: “The difficulty, if you hug and kiss patients, if you allow them to call you by your first name, is that quickly the relationship can become confused as a social one rather than a professional one. Doctors become confused, ‘I really like this person, how can I bear to tell them that they’re going to die?’ They find it more difficult to be objective.”
1. Why are friendly doctors bad for their patients’health?| A．They don’t like to cheat patients. |
| B．They are not good at treating patients. |
| C．They find it not easier to be objective to the patients. |
| D．They seldom blur the relationship with patients. |
| A．Add patients as friends on Facebook. |
| B．Have close connection with patients in life. |
| C．Always be cold to patients. |
| D．Keep a proper distance to patients. |
| A．Oncology is a rewarding profession without challenges. |
| B．The Internet makes it easier for young doctors to break the boundaries. |
| C．It’s not the duty of doctors to deal with patients’ anxiety. |
| D．Becoming friends with patients will help them recover soon. |
| A．dealing with a lot of life-threatening diseases |
| B．discussing difficulties of treatment with patients |
| C．explaining the reason for the lack of some medicine |
| D．informing patients of the possible results of the treatment |
【推荐2】The term "adulting" started as a sort of joke-whenever a millennial(千禧一代)would do something age-acceptable, this was an act of "adulting". Now, though, millennials obviously require training in being an adult.
Rachel Flehinger has founded an Adulting School, which includes online courses on simple sewing, conflict solution and cooking. The cause for such classes is that many millennials haven't left childhood homes-in America 34 percent of adults aged 18 to 34 still lived with their parents as of 2015, up from 26 percent ten years before.
There's a good deal of truth to this. If you're living at home,with Mom and Dad doing their best to spoil（溺爱）you, you're less likely to know how to do laundry, cook or make the bed. Dependency breeds enervation.
But living at home doesn't necessarily lead to dependency. As of 1940, more than 30 percent of 25-to-29-year-olds lived at home with parents or grandparents.They were adulting, even while living at home. Parents expected their kids to do chores, to prepare for life. Instead of blaming living at home, then, we have to blame our style of parenting. The truth is that we've simply become lazier as parents.
So what's the real problem?
We're more likely to let our kids lie on a sofa than tell them to get a job and pay rent. We don't push our kids to build families of their own, as life spending has increased. Americans aren't expected to start building a life, particularly middle-and-upper-class Americans, until they're nearing their 30s. Then the question is how we can encourage young people to "adult" in non-circumstance-driven fashion.
1. What does the last sentence "Dependency breeds enervation" in the third paragraph mean?| A．Present kids are too lazy to do housework. |
| B．Parents would like to do housework by themselves. |
| C．Kids depend on their parents. |
| D．Dependency makes kids unable to do things. |
| A．Millennials would like to be trained in being an adult. |
| B．Millennials don't adult because they still live in their childhood homes. |
| C．Parents are too lazy to do chores. |
| D．In the 1940s kids were adulting even when they were living at home. |
| A．Millennials should leave home early to adult. |
| B．"Adulting" is hard mostly because parents hardly push their children into society. |
| C．Americans aren't expected to start building a life until they're nearing their 30s. |
| D．Adulting schools with online courses are popular. |
| A．The government should put off the age of adulthood. |
| B．Parents should leave kids in charge of society. |
| C．Parents should put responsibility on young people. |
| D．Pushing kids to adult is painful for parents. |
【推荐3】Bitcoin and other so-called cryptocurrencies （加密货币）have been all over the news lately. Apparently, the idea of money that's not tied to a specific bank—or a specific country—is appealing to many. But it's worth remembering that the banking system that we now all live with is just that： A modern invention. Not so long ago, money was almost always created and used locally, and bartering was common. （In fact, it still is common among many online local networks, like the Buy Nothing Project.）.
In the past, money's makeup varied from place to place, depending on what was considered valuable there. So while some of the world's first coins were made from a naturally occurring hybrid of gold and silver called electrum （银金矿），objects other than coins have served as currency, including beads, ivory, livestock, and cowrie shells. In West Africa, bracelets of bronze or copper were used as cash, especially if the transaction was associated with the slave trade there. Throughout the colonial period, tobacco was used to replace coins or paper bills in Virginia, Maryland and North Carolina, even though it was used elsewhere in the colonies and extensively throughout Europe and the U. K.
Today, on an island in the Pacific, a specific type of shell still serves as currency—and some people there are even hoarding（贮存）it, just like Bitcoin moguls, convinced that one day, it will make them wealthy beyond imagination. On Malaita, the most-populated island that's part of the Solomon Islands, shells are accepted at most places in exchange for goods.
"How much tuna（金枪鱼）you can get for your shells depends on their color and shape," Mary Bruno, a shop owner from the small town of Auki, on Malaita, told Vice. "One strip of darker shells might get you about two cans of smaller tuna, but the red ones are worth more. For the red ones, one strip might get enough tuna to feed a big family for a long time."
Just like a mint that creates coins, there's only one place on the island where the shells, which are polished and strung together to form 3-foot-long ropes, are made. The strips of red, white, and black shells all come from Langa Langa Lagoon, where artificial islands were long-ago built by locals to escape from the island-dwelling cannibals. Once marooned（困住）out on their islands, locals needed a currency to use among themselves, and so the shell currency was born.
Using shells for money was common throughout the Pacific islands as late as the early 1900s, but Malaita is unique in that they are still used today. And just like cryptocurrencies, there are those who think the islanders are smart to invest in this type of money, which is reported to have risen in value over the last three decades. It might seem strange to hoard a bunch of processed, strung-together shells, but what is a pile of dollars? Just a specially printed piece of paper and hemp that we've assigned value to—and probably less durable over time than those shells.
1. According to the passage, which of the following is TRUE?| A．Money was created and was widely used in the world. |
| B．Tobacco was used as coins or paper bills in American in the past. |
| C．The ingredients of world’s first coins may be the combination of gold and silver. |
| D．Using shells for money has been out of date in the world. |
| A．a kind of money that can exchange |
| B．the leaves of a mint plant used fresh or candied |
| C．a place to produce and polish shells |
| D．a factory that produces currency |
| A．Reasonable. | B．Imaginary. |
| C．Convenient. | D．Inventive. |
| A．The History of Bitcoin |
| B．Shells Still Money |
| C．The Currency Is of Great Use |
| D．Some Shells |
【推荐1】Climate change will increase US wildfires,and the smoky air will cause terrible problems in areas far beyond those burned,reports an environmental group Thursday.
Two-thirds of Americans,or nearly 212 million,lived in states suffering from wildfire smoke three years ago,according to the report by the Natural Resources Defense Council(NRDC).These areas,which had smoke for at least a week,were nearly 50 times greater than those burned directly by fire.
“It affects a much wide area of the United States than people have realized.” says author Kim Knowlton,a Columbia University health professor,adding the smoke can move up to hundreds of miles.She says the smoke contains air pollution and can cause several kinds of diseases.
Texas was hit hardest in 2011,when smoke stayed for at least a week in areas that are home to 25 million people,according to NRDC’s report.Illinois,which recorded no wildfires within its borders, came second with nearly 12 million people affected by smoke that moved in from elsewhere.The other eight states with the most people in touch with smoky air were,in descending order: Florida,Missouri,Georgia,Louisiana,Michigan,Alabama,Oklahoma and Iowa.
Nearly two dozen states had no wildfires within their borders in 2011,but eight of them still had at least one week of smoky air: Illinois,Missouri，Iowa,Kansas,Nebraska,Indiana,Wisconsin and Ohio.
Only 18 states and the District of Columbia had no people in touch with at least a week of smoke that year,although five of them—Alaska,California,Hawaii,Nevada and Utah—had a large area burned by wildfires.
The problem will only get worse.Knowlton says.Scientific research shows climate is causing higher temperatures and health problems.
1. We can learn from the first two paragraphs that_______.| A．climate change killed many Americans |
| B．there are fewer states burned by wildfires |
| C．every state had wildfire smoke for at least a week |
| D．most Americans suffered from wildfire smoke 3 year ago |
| A．Iowa. | B．Kansas. |
| C．Ohio. | D．California. |
| A．going down | B．coming true |
| C．looking practical | D．turning back |
| A．Climate change causes more wildfires. |
| B．Wildfire smoke becomes a serious health problem. |
| C．More wildfires cause climate changes. |
| D．Air pollution becomes a terrible problem. |
【推荐2】Getting active in midlife could be as good for you as starting young when it comes to reducing the risk of an early death, researchers have suggested. But experts say the study also shows that the benefits fade once exercise declines.
“If you maintain an active lifestyle or participate in some sort of exercise from youth to middle age, you can reduce your risk for dying,” said Dr. Pedro Saint-Maurice, the lead author of the research. “If you are not active and you get to your 40s - 50s and you decide to become active, you can still enjoy a lot of those benefits.”
The study was based on data from more than 300,000 Americans aged 50 - 71 who undertook a questionnaire(问卷) in the late-1990s. They were asked to recall the extent of their moderate to vigorous leisure exercise at different stages of their life. Researchers then used national records to track who died in the years up to the end of 2016. After taking into account factors including age, sex, smoking and diet, the team found that those who were exercising into middle age had a lower risk of death than those who had never carried out any leisure exercise. However, when the team looked at different patterns in the way people were active over their life, it found a surprise.
Men and women who started exercising at the age of 40 - 50 reduced their risk of death from any cause by about 35%. The benefit was similar to that seen for people who reached and maintained similar activity from their teens or 20s onwards.
However, the study found that the protective effect of exercise did not last forever. People whose levels of leisure exercise decreased by middle age had no difference in the risk of an early death to those who had always been couch potatoes. “If you have been active and you slowly decrease your exercise participation as you age, you lose a lot of the benefits that we know are associated with exercise,” Saint - Maurice said.
But the study has limitations, including that it is based on individuals recalling how active they were many years before. What’s more, the research looked only at death records, not other aspects of health such as levels of sickness and disease. Nonetheless, he said, the message was positive. “This adds to the growing body of evidence about the importance of physical activity and exercise across he life course, and indicates that it is never too late to start.”
1. Which of the following is TRUE about the study?| A．The study took about two decades to complete. |
| B．The study involved around 30,000 elderly Americans. |
| C．Questionnaires and interviews were the sources of data. |
| D．The participants in the study took regular physical exercise. |
| A．The earlier you exercise, the greater your health benefits will be. |
| B．Participating in exercise from youth to middle age benefits one’s health greatly. |
| C．The benefit of getting active in midlife is similar to that of starting young. |
| D．The benefits of exercising in midlife will decline once you stop exercising. |
| A．an active lifestyle will not necessarily bring positive health benefits. |
| B．participants’ memories may affect the reliability of the study result |
| C．people exercising from their teens can maintain health forever |
| D．women benefit more from vigorous exercise than men do |
| A．Exercise has its limitations, studies show |
| B．Getting active when young, experts suggest |
| C．Health benefits fade with age, doctors warn |
| D．Never too old to start, researchers say |
【推荐3】After about two weeks of intense negotiations in Paris, delegates from around the world reached an international agreement on Dec. 12 to address climate change. For the first time in history, 195 countries have promised to reduce greenhouse gas（GHG）emissions and to increase these reductions over time.
The agreement goes beyond requiring developed countries like the US to take actions to cut down emissions. It's a universal agreement requiring some form of action from every country, rich or poor.
The agreement sets the date for an emissions peak "as soon as possible". It would also limit warming worldwide to less than 2℃ above the levels in the 1800s. According to scientific studies 2℃ is the point at which climate change will bring destructive consequences to the planet, including rising sea levels, severe droughts, increased flooding, destructive storms, and widespread food and water shortages.
The deal also urges wealthy countries to set a non- binding goal of providing more than $100 billion（650 billion yuan）per year in public and private financing by 2020 for poorer countries to help them invest in clean energy and combat the impact of climate change.
The Paris deal asks countries to make voluntary promises based on an analysis of each country's economy, politics and technology. However, the deal also includes a series of legally binding（有约束力的）requirements. It requires countries to reconvene every five years, starting in 2020, with updated plans that would cut their further emissions. Countries will also be legally required to reconvene every five years starting in 2023 to publicly report on their progress.
The Paris deal alone won't solve global warming. Its effectiveness will depend on whether each country enacts（立法）their promise. But the deal "could be viewed as a signal to global financial and energy markets, triggering a fundamental shift away from investment in coal, oil and gas as primary energy sources like wind, solar and nuclear power", according to The New York Times.
1. Which of the following is true according to the passage?| A．The agreement requires only developed countries to take actions to cut down emissions. |
| B．The agreement would limit warming worldwide to 2℃ less than the levels in the 1800s. |
| C．The agreement requires some form of action from all the countries in the world |
| D．The constant global warming will do great harm to the planet. |
| A．do something to fight against the influence of climate change |
| B．invest more in coal, oil and gas as primary energy sources |
| C．provide more than $100 billion per year in public and private financing |
| D．report on their progress of reducing their emissions every 5 years in Paris |
| A．Meet | B．Report. | C．Promise | D．Return. |
| A．a science magazine | B．a newspaper |
| C．a school text | D．an economic lecture |
