option
list | question
stringlengths 11
354
| article
stringlengths 231
6.74k
| id
stringlengths 5
8
| label
int64 0
3
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
[
"improvements in transportation benefited the Hopewell ironworks",
"iron was used in the construction of various types of transportation",
"the transportation system of Pennsylvania was superior to that of other states.",
"Hopewell never became a major transportation center"
]
| The passage mentions "roads, canals, and railroads" in line 25 in order to explain that | Pennsylvania's colonial ironmasters forged iron and a revolution that had both industrial and political implications. The colonists in North America wanted the right to the profits gained from their manufacturing. However, England wanted all of the colonies' rich ores and raw materials to feed its own factories, and also wanted the colonies to be a market for its finished goods. England passed legislation in 1750 to prohibit colonists from making finished iron products, but by 1771, when entrepreneur Mark Bird established the Hopewell blast furnace in Pennsylvania, iron making had become the backbone of American industry. It also had become one of the major issues that fomented the revolutionary break between England and the British colonies. By the time the War of Independence broke out in 1776, Bird, angered and determined, was manufacturing cannons and shot at Hopewell to be used by the Continental Army.
After the war, Hopewell, along with hundreds of other "iron plantations," continued to form the new nation's industrial foundation well into the nineteenth century. The rural landscape became dotted with tall stone pyramids that breathed flames and smoke, charcoal-fueled iron furnaces that produced the versatile metal so crucial to the nation's growth. Generations of ironmasters, craftspeople, and workers produced goods during war and peace-ranging from cannons and shot to domestic items such as cast-iron stoves, pots, and sash weights for windows.
The region around Hopewell had everything needed for iron production: a wealth of iron ore near the surface, limestone for removing impurities from the iron, hardwood forests to supply the charcoal used for fuel, rushing water to power the bellows that pumped blasts of air into the furnace fires, and workers to supply the labor. By the 1830's, Hopewell had developed a reputation for producing high quality cast-iron stoves, for which there was a steady market. As Pennsylvania added more links to its transportation system of roads, canals, and railroads, it became easier to ship parts made by Hopewell workers to sites all over the east coast. There they were assembled into stoves and sold from Rhode Island to Maryland as the "Hopewell stove". By the time the last fires burned out at Hopewell ironworks in 1883, the community had produced some 80,000 cast-iron stoves. | 1673.txt | 0 |
[
"links",
"parts",
"workers",
"sites"
]
| The word "they" in line 26 refers to | Pennsylvania's colonial ironmasters forged iron and a revolution that had both industrial and political implications. The colonists in North America wanted the right to the profits gained from their manufacturing. However, England wanted all of the colonies' rich ores and raw materials to feed its own factories, and also wanted the colonies to be a market for its finished goods. England passed legislation in 1750 to prohibit colonists from making finished iron products, but by 1771, when entrepreneur Mark Bird established the Hopewell blast furnace in Pennsylvania, iron making had become the backbone of American industry. It also had become one of the major issues that fomented the revolutionary break between England and the British colonies. By the time the War of Independence broke out in 1776, Bird, angered and determined, was manufacturing cannons and shot at Hopewell to be used by the Continental Army.
After the war, Hopewell, along with hundreds of other "iron plantations," continued to form the new nation's industrial foundation well into the nineteenth century. The rural landscape became dotted with tall stone pyramids that breathed flames and smoke, charcoal-fueled iron furnaces that produced the versatile metal so crucial to the nation's growth. Generations of ironmasters, craftspeople, and workers produced goods during war and peace-ranging from cannons and shot to domestic items such as cast-iron stoves, pots, and sash weights for windows.
The region around Hopewell had everything needed for iron production: a wealth of iron ore near the surface, limestone for removing impurities from the iron, hardwood forests to supply the charcoal used for fuel, rushing water to power the bellows that pumped blasts of air into the furnace fires, and workers to supply the labor. By the 1830's, Hopewell had developed a reputation for producing high quality cast-iron stoves, for which there was a steady market. As Pennsylvania added more links to its transportation system of roads, canals, and railroads, it became easier to ship parts made by Hopewell workers to sites all over the east coast. There they were assembled into stoves and sold from Rhode Island to Maryland as the "Hopewell stove". By the time the last fires burned out at Hopewell ironworks in 1883, the community had produced some 80,000 cast-iron stoves. | 1673.txt | 1 |
[
"only",
"a maximum of",
"approximately",
"a variety of"
]
| The word "some" in line 28 is closest in meaning to | Pennsylvania's colonial ironmasters forged iron and a revolution that had both industrial and political implications. The colonists in North America wanted the right to the profits gained from their manufacturing. However, England wanted all of the colonies' rich ores and raw materials to feed its own factories, and also wanted the colonies to be a market for its finished goods. England passed legislation in 1750 to prohibit colonists from making finished iron products, but by 1771, when entrepreneur Mark Bird established the Hopewell blast furnace in Pennsylvania, iron making had become the backbone of American industry. It also had become one of the major issues that fomented the revolutionary break between England and the British colonies. By the time the War of Independence broke out in 1776, Bird, angered and determined, was manufacturing cannons and shot at Hopewell to be used by the Continental Army.
After the war, Hopewell, along with hundreds of other "iron plantations," continued to form the new nation's industrial foundation well into the nineteenth century. The rural landscape became dotted with tall stone pyramids that breathed flames and smoke, charcoal-fueled iron furnaces that produced the versatile metal so crucial to the nation's growth. Generations of ironmasters, craftspeople, and workers produced goods during war and peace-ranging from cannons and shot to domestic items such as cast-iron stoves, pots, and sash weights for windows.
The region around Hopewell had everything needed for iron production: a wealth of iron ore near the surface, limestone for removing impurities from the iron, hardwood forests to supply the charcoal used for fuel, rushing water to power the bellows that pumped blasts of air into the furnace fires, and workers to supply the labor. By the 1830's, Hopewell had developed a reputation for producing high quality cast-iron stoves, for which there was a steady market. As Pennsylvania added more links to its transportation system of roads, canals, and railroads, it became easier to ship parts made by Hopewell workers to sites all over the east coast. There they were assembled into stoves and sold from Rhode Island to Maryland as the "Hopewell stove". By the time the last fires burned out at Hopewell ironworks in 1883, the community had produced some 80,000 cast-iron stoves. | 1673.txt | 2 |
[
"human population data",
"the species' population size",
"the species' rate of decline",
"the geographic range of the species"
]
| The Red List used to determine the risk of extinction a species may run by assessing all of the following, EXCEPT _ | The well-known Red List that details which species are threatened with extinction is inaccurate, according to a new assessment. It concludes the list fails to reflect the true threat to species, by not taking full account of the threat posed by people.
The Red List, which is compiled by the World Conservation Union (IUCN), gauges a species' risk of extinction mainly on the basis of its population size, rate of decline and geographic range.
But Alexander Harcourt and Scan Parks at the University of California, Davis, argue that this is not enough. They compare an endangered species to a house that has been left unlocked. The house is vulnerable to burglary, but it only becomes threatened when there is a burglar nearby.
In the same way, a small population of animals susceptible to extinction only becomes actively threatened when it is being poached or its habitat is destroyed. Harcourt and Parks advocate modifying he Red List criteria to include local human population density.
Although a large number of people nearby may not in itself be a threat, they argue that hunting pollution and habitat destruction, for example, are all likely to increase as people encroach on wildlife. What is more, data on human density is readily available. We have the numbers, why not use them? says Harcourt.
To illustrate their point, the researchers reassessed 200 primate species from the 1996 Red List, They found that 17 species designated as being at relatively low risk by the Red List should now be reassigned as high priority.
Contrary to the expectations of many, the researchers also found that two high-profile species, the gorilla and the pygmy chimpanzee, or bonobo, should be downgraded to a lower level of threat.
But Craig Hilton-Taylor, Red List Programme Officer based in Cambridge, England, says that theIUCN has already introduced a specific classification system for threats-such as human density. The system runs in parallel to the main Red List classification.
Besides, part of the Red List's value is that you can make comparisons with past assessments, he says, and tweaking the criteria would make this impossible. Weve been asked by everyone, please don' t change the system again, says Hilton-Taylor.
Harcourt maintains that making explicit threats part of the criteria is not only more accurate, it may also help highlight future problems. Matt Walpole, a conservation researcher at the University of Kent at Canterbury, England, agrees: Where population data is lacking, it might be a useful way of flagging up potentially threatened species. [417 words] | 1201.txt | 0 |
[
"an unlocked house is vulnerable to burglary",
"an unlocked house is not threatened without a burglar nearby",
"no other comparisons are more intelligible than this one",
"the Red List fails to reflect the threat posed by people to rare species"
]
| An endangered species is compared to an unlocked house in order to show that _ | The well-known Red List that details which species are threatened with extinction is inaccurate, according to a new assessment. It concludes the list fails to reflect the true threat to species, by not taking full account of the threat posed by people.
The Red List, which is compiled by the World Conservation Union (IUCN), gauges a species' risk of extinction mainly on the basis of its population size, rate of decline and geographic range.
But Alexander Harcourt and Scan Parks at the University of California, Davis, argue that this is not enough. They compare an endangered species to a house that has been left unlocked. The house is vulnerable to burglary, but it only becomes threatened when there is a burglar nearby.
In the same way, a small population of animals susceptible to extinction only becomes actively threatened when it is being poached or its habitat is destroyed. Harcourt and Parks advocate modifying he Red List criteria to include local human population density.
Although a large number of people nearby may not in itself be a threat, they argue that hunting pollution and habitat destruction, for example, are all likely to increase as people encroach on wildlife. What is more, data on human density is readily available. We have the numbers, why not use them? says Harcourt.
To illustrate their point, the researchers reassessed 200 primate species from the 1996 Red List, They found that 17 species designated as being at relatively low risk by the Red List should now be reassigned as high priority.
Contrary to the expectations of many, the researchers also found that two high-profile species, the gorilla and the pygmy chimpanzee, or bonobo, should be downgraded to a lower level of threat.
But Craig Hilton-Taylor, Red List Programme Officer based in Cambridge, England, says that theIUCN has already introduced a specific classification system for threats-such as human density. The system runs in parallel to the main Red List classification.
Besides, part of the Red List's value is that you can make comparisons with past assessments, he says, and tweaking the criteria would make this impossible. Weve been asked by everyone, please don' t change the system again, says Hilton-Taylor.
Harcourt maintains that making explicit threats part of the criteria is not only more accurate, it may also help highlight future problems. Matt Walpole, a conservation researcher at the University of Kent at Canterbury, England, agrees: Where population data is lacking, it might be a useful way of flagging up potentially threatened species. [417 words] | 1201.txt | 3 |
[
"a specific classification system",
"a more accurate assessment system",
"the Red List criteria",
"the Red List classification"
]
| In order to indicate the level of threat posed by people to rare species, _ has/have been introduced. | The well-known Red List that details which species are threatened with extinction is inaccurate, according to a new assessment. It concludes the list fails to reflect the true threat to species, by not taking full account of the threat posed by people.
The Red List, which is compiled by the World Conservation Union (IUCN), gauges a species' risk of extinction mainly on the basis of its population size, rate of decline and geographic range.
But Alexander Harcourt and Scan Parks at the University of California, Davis, argue that this is not enough. They compare an endangered species to a house that has been left unlocked. The house is vulnerable to burglary, but it only becomes threatened when there is a burglar nearby.
In the same way, a small population of animals susceptible to extinction only becomes actively threatened when it is being poached or its habitat is destroyed. Harcourt and Parks advocate modifying he Red List criteria to include local human population density.
Although a large number of people nearby may not in itself be a threat, they argue that hunting pollution and habitat destruction, for example, are all likely to increase as people encroach on wildlife. What is more, data on human density is readily available. We have the numbers, why not use them? says Harcourt.
To illustrate their point, the researchers reassessed 200 primate species from the 1996 Red List, They found that 17 species designated as being at relatively low risk by the Red List should now be reassigned as high priority.
Contrary to the expectations of many, the researchers also found that two high-profile species, the gorilla and the pygmy chimpanzee, or bonobo, should be downgraded to a lower level of threat.
But Craig Hilton-Taylor, Red List Programme Officer based in Cambridge, England, says that theIUCN has already introduced a specific classification system for threats-such as human density. The system runs in parallel to the main Red List classification.
Besides, part of the Red List's value is that you can make comparisons with past assessments, he says, and tweaking the criteria would make this impossible. Weve been asked by everyone, please don' t change the system again, says Hilton-Taylor.
Harcourt maintains that making explicit threats part of the criteria is not only more accurate, it may also help highlight future problems. Matt Walpole, a conservation researcher at the University of Kent at Canterbury, England, agrees: Where population data is lacking, it might be a useful way of flagging up potentially threatened species. [417 words] | 1201.txt | 0 |
[
"downgraded",
"upgraded",
"reassessed",
"kept as it is"
]
| The level of risk indicated by the Red List to each endangered species should be _ | The well-known Red List that details which species are threatened with extinction is inaccurate, according to a new assessment. It concludes the list fails to reflect the true threat to species, by not taking full account of the threat posed by people.
The Red List, which is compiled by the World Conservation Union (IUCN), gauges a species' risk of extinction mainly on the basis of its population size, rate of decline and geographic range.
But Alexander Harcourt and Scan Parks at the University of California, Davis, argue that this is not enough. They compare an endangered species to a house that has been left unlocked. The house is vulnerable to burglary, but it only becomes threatened when there is a burglar nearby.
In the same way, a small population of animals susceptible to extinction only becomes actively threatened when it is being poached or its habitat is destroyed. Harcourt and Parks advocate modifying he Red List criteria to include local human population density.
Although a large number of people nearby may not in itself be a threat, they argue that hunting pollution and habitat destruction, for example, are all likely to increase as people encroach on wildlife. What is more, data on human density is readily available. We have the numbers, why not use them? says Harcourt.
To illustrate their point, the researchers reassessed 200 primate species from the 1996 Red List, They found that 17 species designated as being at relatively low risk by the Red List should now be reassigned as high priority.
Contrary to the expectations of many, the researchers also found that two high-profile species, the gorilla and the pygmy chimpanzee, or bonobo, should be downgraded to a lower level of threat.
But Craig Hilton-Taylor, Red List Programme Officer based in Cambridge, England, says that theIUCN has already introduced a specific classification system for threats-such as human density. The system runs in parallel to the main Red List classification.
Besides, part of the Red List's value is that you can make comparisons with past assessments, he says, and tweaking the criteria would make this impossible. Weve been asked by everyone, please don' t change the system again, says Hilton-Taylor.
Harcourt maintains that making explicit threats part of the criteria is not only more accurate, it may also help highlight future problems. Matt Walpole, a conservation researcher at the University of Kent at Canterbury, England, agrees: Where population data is lacking, it might be a useful way of flagging up potentially threatened species. [417 words] | 1201.txt | 2 |
[
"Data on Human Density",
"Red Alert over Rare Species",
"Red List Classification",
"Potentially Threatened Species"
]
| The proper title for this passage should be _ | The well-known Red List that details which species are threatened with extinction is inaccurate, according to a new assessment. It concludes the list fails to reflect the true threat to species, by not taking full account of the threat posed by people.
The Red List, which is compiled by the World Conservation Union (IUCN), gauges a species' risk of extinction mainly on the basis of its population size, rate of decline and geographic range.
But Alexander Harcourt and Scan Parks at the University of California, Davis, argue that this is not enough. They compare an endangered species to a house that has been left unlocked. The house is vulnerable to burglary, but it only becomes threatened when there is a burglar nearby.
In the same way, a small population of animals susceptible to extinction only becomes actively threatened when it is being poached or its habitat is destroyed. Harcourt and Parks advocate modifying he Red List criteria to include local human population density.
Although a large number of people nearby may not in itself be a threat, they argue that hunting pollution and habitat destruction, for example, are all likely to increase as people encroach on wildlife. What is more, data on human density is readily available. We have the numbers, why not use them? says Harcourt.
To illustrate their point, the researchers reassessed 200 primate species from the 1996 Red List, They found that 17 species designated as being at relatively low risk by the Red List should now be reassigned as high priority.
Contrary to the expectations of many, the researchers also found that two high-profile species, the gorilla and the pygmy chimpanzee, or bonobo, should be downgraded to a lower level of threat.
But Craig Hilton-Taylor, Red List Programme Officer based in Cambridge, England, says that theIUCN has already introduced a specific classification system for threats-such as human density. The system runs in parallel to the main Red List classification.
Besides, part of the Red List's value is that you can make comparisons with past assessments, he says, and tweaking the criteria would make this impossible. Weve been asked by everyone, please don' t change the system again, says Hilton-Taylor.
Harcourt maintains that making explicit threats part of the criteria is not only more accurate, it may also help highlight future problems. Matt Walpole, a conservation researcher at the University of Kent at Canterbury, England, agrees: Where population data is lacking, it might be a useful way of flagging up potentially threatened species. [417 words] | 1201.txt | 1 |
[
"Marriage.",
"Love.",
"Family.",
"Friendship."
]
| What is the most popular subject of all forms of entertainment? | If you listen to American music, watch American television or magazines, you will probably agree that the most popular subject of these forms of entertainment is love. Romantic love always finds an audience in the United States. Falling in love, solving the problems of love, and achieving the happy ending --- the big wedding are subjects of interest to the adult as well as the teenage public. Millions of Americans celebrate Valentine's Day with special cards and gifts that announce their love to their mates, their friends, their coworkers, and their families. Popular songs tell us that "all the world loves a lover". A popular saying is "Love conquers all". Numerous columns in magazines and newspapers offer advice to the lovelorn, those with difficulties of the heart. To most Americans, romantic love is central to a happy life.
Not only do Americans believe in romantic love but they also believe that it is the best basis for marriage. Despite the high divorce rate in the United States, young men and women continue to marry on the basis of romantic love. Americans consider marriage a private arrangement between the two people involved. Young Americans feel free to choose their own marriage partners from any social, economic, or religious background. The man or woman may have strong ties with parents, brothers, or sisters, but when he or she falls in love, the strongest feelings are supposed to be for the loved one. When an American couple marries, they generally plan to live apart from both sets of parents and build their own independent family structure. | 2944.txt | 1 |
[
"Adults who are single.",
"Teenagers whose parents are divorced.",
"Old people who have no children.",
"Both adults and teenagers."
]
| Who is interested in the subject of love? | If you listen to American music, watch American television or magazines, you will probably agree that the most popular subject of these forms of entertainment is love. Romantic love always finds an audience in the United States. Falling in love, solving the problems of love, and achieving the happy ending --- the big wedding are subjects of interest to the adult as well as the teenage public. Millions of Americans celebrate Valentine's Day with special cards and gifts that announce their love to their mates, their friends, their coworkers, and their families. Popular songs tell us that "all the world loves a lover". A popular saying is "Love conquers all". Numerous columns in magazines and newspapers offer advice to the lovelorn, those with difficulties of the heart. To most Americans, romantic love is central to a happy life.
Not only do Americans believe in romantic love but they also believe that it is the best basis for marriage. Despite the high divorce rate in the United States, young men and women continue to marry on the basis of romantic love. Americans consider marriage a private arrangement between the two people involved. Young Americans feel free to choose their own marriage partners from any social, economic, or religious background. The man or woman may have strong ties with parents, brothers, or sisters, but when he or she falls in love, the strongest feelings are supposed to be for the loved one. When an American couple marries, they generally plan to live apart from both sets of parents and build their own independent family structure. | 2944.txt | 3 |
[
"It is central to a happy life.",
"It is not the basis for marriage.",
"It is not necessarily important in people's life.",
"Many people long for it, but it is unbelievable."
]
| What do most Americans think of romantic love? | If you listen to American music, watch American television or magazines, you will probably agree that the most popular subject of these forms of entertainment is love. Romantic love always finds an audience in the United States. Falling in love, solving the problems of love, and achieving the happy ending --- the big wedding are subjects of interest to the adult as well as the teenage public. Millions of Americans celebrate Valentine's Day with special cards and gifts that announce their love to their mates, their friends, their coworkers, and their families. Popular songs tell us that "all the world loves a lover". A popular saying is "Love conquers all". Numerous columns in magazines and newspapers offer advice to the lovelorn, those with difficulties of the heart. To most Americans, romantic love is central to a happy life.
Not only do Americans believe in romantic love but they also believe that it is the best basis for marriage. Despite the high divorce rate in the United States, young men and women continue to marry on the basis of romantic love. Americans consider marriage a private arrangement between the two people involved. Young Americans feel free to choose their own marriage partners from any social, economic, or religious background. The man or woman may have strong ties with parents, brothers, or sisters, but when he or she falls in love, the strongest feelings are supposed to be for the loved one. When an American couple marries, they generally plan to live apart from both sets of parents and build their own independent family structure. | 2944.txt | 0 |
[
"They will think about their social background.",
"They think economic background is essential.",
"They won't choose a marriage partner from different religious background.",
"they don't think social economic or religious background is important."
]
| What factors do young Americans consider when choosing their own marriage partners? | If you listen to American music, watch American television or magazines, you will probably agree that the most popular subject of these forms of entertainment is love. Romantic love always finds an audience in the United States. Falling in love, solving the problems of love, and achieving the happy ending --- the big wedding are subjects of interest to the adult as well as the teenage public. Millions of Americans celebrate Valentine's Day with special cards and gifts that announce their love to their mates, their friends, their coworkers, and their families. Popular songs tell us that "all the world loves a lover". A popular saying is "Love conquers all". Numerous columns in magazines and newspapers offer advice to the lovelorn, those with difficulties of the heart. To most Americans, romantic love is central to a happy life.
Not only do Americans believe in romantic love but they also believe that it is the best basis for marriage. Despite the high divorce rate in the United States, young men and women continue to marry on the basis of romantic love. Americans consider marriage a private arrangement between the two people involved. Young Americans feel free to choose their own marriage partners from any social, economic, or religious background. The man or woman may have strong ties with parents, brothers, or sisters, but when he or she falls in love, the strongest feelings are supposed to be for the loved one. When an American couple marries, they generally plan to live apart from both sets of parents and build their own independent family structure. | 2944.txt | 3 |
[
"They continue to live with their parents after their marriage.",
"They plan to live by themselves.",
"They plan to earn more money to buy a house.",
"They plan to travel all over the world."
]
| What does an American couple plan to do when they marry? | If you listen to American music, watch American television or magazines, you will probably agree that the most popular subject of these forms of entertainment is love. Romantic love always finds an audience in the United States. Falling in love, solving the problems of love, and achieving the happy ending --- the big wedding are subjects of interest to the adult as well as the teenage public. Millions of Americans celebrate Valentine's Day with special cards and gifts that announce their love to their mates, their friends, their coworkers, and their families. Popular songs tell us that "all the world loves a lover". A popular saying is "Love conquers all". Numerous columns in magazines and newspapers offer advice to the lovelorn, those with difficulties of the heart. To most Americans, romantic love is central to a happy life.
Not only do Americans believe in romantic love but they also believe that it is the best basis for marriage. Despite the high divorce rate in the United States, young men and women continue to marry on the basis of romantic love. Americans consider marriage a private arrangement between the two people involved. Young Americans feel free to choose their own marriage partners from any social, economic, or religious background. The man or woman may have strong ties with parents, brothers, or sisters, but when he or she falls in love, the strongest feelings are supposed to be for the loved one. When an American couple marries, they generally plan to live apart from both sets of parents and build their own independent family structure. | 2944.txt | 1 |
[
"confusing.",
"extraordinary.",
"quite common.",
"universal."
]
| According to the author, diversity is | What comes to mind when you hear the word--diversity? Issues of race or gender may spring to mind.Equal rights? Or minority issues?
I encourage people to look at a much wider definition of the word.1 would tend to say diversity is "differentness" in any form.A good example of this kind of diversity has been experienced by every person who ever left behind the comforts of home and moved into uncharted territory.Issues of diversity are informed not only by your cultural background and context，but also by your religion，age，field of work，family situation， personality，and countless other factors that make us unique.Diversity affects everyone.
It's for this reason that diversity has become such a buzz word.The buzz happens because it's all about how you handle it.It's very much like the job a composer has when creating a great musical composition.If the composer understands what each unique note and dynamic mark is capable of in combination with the other parts，the result achieved is extraordinary.If, however，none of the parts is communicating with the others，we're left with a cacophony.
On a personal level.it's this understanding and acceptance of "the other" which rests at the core of diversity.Whether we're talking about navigating through a multicultural urban environment or uprooting and moving to a new foreign social context，it is necessary to set aside rigid assumptions about "the other" and put oneself in the other's shoes. So how do we make this leap? It's often as simple as asking questions and being careful not to assume that what you see is necessarily what the other side sees.
Often in my workshops I give a magic lesson to the audience to illustrate this principle. I first present the magic and accomplish the "impossible". The participants receive the same props but simply can't manage. We look more carefully at the situation and realize that the assumptions they made about it actually blocked them from achieving this feat; a feat they suddenly are empowered to do which, moments ago, was impossible.
The goal in being sensitive to diversity is to cultivate a culture of respect for people's differences and understand that such an environment is beneficial to everyone involved.
Diversity awareness is an evolution. We can't get there by snapping our fingers, and it isn't a matter of training people to have textbook politically correct attitudes. Instead it's a case of looking at the big picture of how we see the world, understanding why we see it that way, and then making sure we do our part to genuinely value difference and benefit from it. | 102.txt | 3 |
[
"diversity.",
"the buzz.",
"how to handle diversity.",
"the formation of diversity."
]
| "It" in Paragraph Three refers to | What comes to mind when you hear the word--diversity? Issues of race or gender may spring to mind.Equal rights? Or minority issues?
I encourage people to look at a much wider definition of the word.1 would tend to say diversity is "differentness" in any form.A good example of this kind of diversity has been experienced by every person who ever left behind the comforts of home and moved into uncharted territory.Issues of diversity are informed not only by your cultural background and context，but also by your religion，age，field of work，family situation， personality，and countless other factors that make us unique.Diversity affects everyone.
It's for this reason that diversity has become such a buzz word.The buzz happens because it's all about how you handle it.It's very much like the job a composer has when creating a great musical composition.If the composer understands what each unique note and dynamic mark is capable of in combination with the other parts，the result achieved is extraordinary.If, however，none of the parts is communicating with the others，we're left with a cacophony.
On a personal level.it's this understanding and acceptance of "the other" which rests at the core of diversity.Whether we're talking about navigating through a multicultural urban environment or uprooting and moving to a new foreign social context，it is necessary to set aside rigid assumptions about "the other" and put oneself in the other's shoes. So how do we make this leap? It's often as simple as asking questions and being careful not to assume that what you see is necessarily what the other side sees.
Often in my workshops I give a magic lesson to the audience to illustrate this principle. I first present the magic and accomplish the "impossible". The participants receive the same props but simply can't manage. We look more carefully at the situation and realize that the assumptions they made about it actually blocked them from achieving this feat; a feat they suddenly are empowered to do which, moments ago, was impossible.
The goal in being sensitive to diversity is to cultivate a culture of respect for people's differences and understand that such an environment is beneficial to everyone involved.
Diversity awareness is an evolution. We can't get there by snapping our fingers, and it isn't a matter of training people to have textbook politically correct attitudes. Instead it's a case of looking at the big picture of how we see the world, understanding why we see it that way, and then making sure we do our part to genuinely value difference and benefit from it. | 102.txt | 2 |
[
"to handle diversity one should put himself in others' shoes.",
"when you are in a foreign environment, do as the Romans do.",
"diversity can hardly be defined.",
"diversity derives from cultural difference."
]
| The author believes that | What comes to mind when you hear the word--diversity? Issues of race or gender may spring to mind.Equal rights? Or minority issues?
I encourage people to look at a much wider definition of the word.1 would tend to say diversity is "differentness" in any form.A good example of this kind of diversity has been experienced by every person who ever left behind the comforts of home and moved into uncharted territory.Issues of diversity are informed not only by your cultural background and context，but also by your religion，age，field of work，family situation， personality，and countless other factors that make us unique.Diversity affects everyone.
It's for this reason that diversity has become such a buzz word.The buzz happens because it's all about how you handle it.It's very much like the job a composer has when creating a great musical composition.If the composer understands what each unique note and dynamic mark is capable of in combination with the other parts，the result achieved is extraordinary.If, however，none of the parts is communicating with the others，we're left with a cacophony.
On a personal level.it's this understanding and acceptance of "the other" which rests at the core of diversity.Whether we're talking about navigating through a multicultural urban environment or uprooting and moving to a new foreign social context，it is necessary to set aside rigid assumptions about "the other" and put oneself in the other's shoes. So how do we make this leap? It's often as simple as asking questions and being careful not to assume that what you see is necessarily what the other side sees.
Often in my workshops I give a magic lesson to the audience to illustrate this principle. I first present the magic and accomplish the "impossible". The participants receive the same props but simply can't manage. We look more carefully at the situation and realize that the assumptions they made about it actually blocked them from achieving this feat; a feat they suddenly are empowered to do which, moments ago, was impossible.
The goal in being sensitive to diversity is to cultivate a culture of respect for people's differences and understand that such an environment is beneficial to everyone involved.
Diversity awareness is an evolution. We can't get there by snapping our fingers, and it isn't a matter of training people to have textbook politically correct attitudes. Instead it's a case of looking at the big picture of how we see the world, understanding why we see it that way, and then making sure we do our part to genuinely value difference and benefit from it. | 102.txt | 0 |
[
"everyone can do magic.",
"magic is nothing but a feat.",
"what blocks people from handling diversity.",
"it is possible to achieve anything."
]
| The example of a magic lesson is to show | What comes to mind when you hear the word--diversity? Issues of race or gender may spring to mind.Equal rights? Or minority issues?
I encourage people to look at a much wider definition of the word.1 would tend to say diversity is "differentness" in any form.A good example of this kind of diversity has been experienced by every person who ever left behind the comforts of home and moved into uncharted territory.Issues of diversity are informed not only by your cultural background and context，but also by your religion，age，field of work，family situation， personality，and countless other factors that make us unique.Diversity affects everyone.
It's for this reason that diversity has become such a buzz word.The buzz happens because it's all about how you handle it.It's very much like the job a composer has when creating a great musical composition.If the composer understands what each unique note and dynamic mark is capable of in combination with the other parts，the result achieved is extraordinary.If, however，none of the parts is communicating with the others，we're left with a cacophony.
On a personal level.it's this understanding and acceptance of "the other" which rests at the core of diversity.Whether we're talking about navigating through a multicultural urban environment or uprooting and moving to a new foreign social context，it is necessary to set aside rigid assumptions about "the other" and put oneself in the other's shoes. So how do we make this leap? It's often as simple as asking questions and being careful not to assume that what you see is necessarily what the other side sees.
Often in my workshops I give a magic lesson to the audience to illustrate this principle. I first present the magic and accomplish the "impossible". The participants receive the same props but simply can't manage. We look more carefully at the situation and realize that the assumptions they made about it actually blocked them from achieving this feat; a feat they suddenly are empowered to do which, moments ago, was impossible.
The goal in being sensitive to diversity is to cultivate a culture of respect for people's differences and understand that such an environment is beneficial to everyone involved.
Diversity awareness is an evolution. We can't get there by snapping our fingers, and it isn't a matter of training people to have textbook politically correct attitudes. Instead it's a case of looking at the big picture of how we see the world, understanding why we see it that way, and then making sure we do our part to genuinely value difference and benefit from it. | 102.txt | 2 |
[
"By living in an unfamiliar environment.",
"By having politically correct attitudes.",
"By being sensitive to everything one experiences.",
"By understanding people's differences."
]
| How to raise diversity awareness according to the author? | What comes to mind when you hear the word--diversity? Issues of race or gender may spring to mind.Equal rights? Or minority issues?
I encourage people to look at a much wider definition of the word.1 would tend to say diversity is "differentness" in any form.A good example of this kind of diversity has been experienced by every person who ever left behind the comforts of home and moved into uncharted territory.Issues of diversity are informed not only by your cultural background and context，but also by your religion，age，field of work，family situation， personality，and countless other factors that make us unique.Diversity affects everyone.
It's for this reason that diversity has become such a buzz word.The buzz happens because it's all about how you handle it.It's very much like the job a composer has when creating a great musical composition.If the composer understands what each unique note and dynamic mark is capable of in combination with the other parts，the result achieved is extraordinary.If, however，none of the parts is communicating with the others，we're left with a cacophony.
On a personal level.it's this understanding and acceptance of "the other" which rests at the core of diversity.Whether we're talking about navigating through a multicultural urban environment or uprooting and moving to a new foreign social context，it is necessary to set aside rigid assumptions about "the other" and put oneself in the other's shoes. So how do we make this leap? It's often as simple as asking questions and being careful not to assume that what you see is necessarily what the other side sees.
Often in my workshops I give a magic lesson to the audience to illustrate this principle. I first present the magic and accomplish the "impossible". The participants receive the same props but simply can't manage. We look more carefully at the situation and realize that the assumptions they made about it actually blocked them from achieving this feat; a feat they suddenly are empowered to do which, moments ago, was impossible.
The goal in being sensitive to diversity is to cultivate a culture of respect for people's differences and understand that such an environment is beneficial to everyone involved.
Diversity awareness is an evolution. We can't get there by snapping our fingers, and it isn't a matter of training people to have textbook politically correct attitudes. Instead it's a case of looking at the big picture of how we see the world, understanding why we see it that way, and then making sure we do our part to genuinely value difference and benefit from it. | 102.txt | 3 |
[
"They should be given a check-up.",
"They really need money to live.",
"They have no pleasure in life.",
"They are not worth helping."
]
| What does the author think of beggars who take drugs? | Why I Don't Spare "Spare Change"
"Poor but honest." "The deserving poor." These words always come to my mind when I think of "the poor." But I also think of people who, perhaps through alcohol or drugs, have ruined not only their own lives but also the lives of others in order to give way to their own pleasure. Perhaps alcoholism and drug addiction really are "diseases," as many people say, but my own feeling - based. Of course, not on any serious study - is that most alcoholics and drug addicts belong to the "undeserving poor." And that is largely why I don't give spare change to beggars.
But surely among the street people there are also some who can rightly be called "deserving." Deserving what? My spare change? Or simply the government's assistance? It happens that I have been brought up to believe that it is proper to make contributions to charity , but if I give some change to a beggar, am I making a contribution to charity and thereby helping someone, or, am I perhaps simply encouraging someone not to get help? Or, maybe even worse, am I supporting a cheat?
If one believes in the value of private charity, one can either give to needy people or to charitable organizations. In giving to a beggar one may indeed be helping a person who badly needs help, but one cannot be certain that one is giving to a needy person. In giving to an organization, on the other hand, one can feel that one's money is likely to be used wisely. True, facing a beggar one may feel that this particular unfortunate person needs help at this moment - a cup of coffee or a sandwich - and the need will not be met unless I put my hand in my pocket right now. But I have come to think that the beggars whom I meet can get along without my spare change, and indeed perhaps they are actually better off for not having money to buy alcohol or drugs.
I know nothing about these beggars, but it's my impression that they simply prefer begging to working. I am not generalizing about street people. I am talking about the about whom I acturally meet. That's why I do not give "spare change," and I don't think I will in the future. | 3338.txt | 3 |
[
"He doesn't think they need help.",
"He doesn't have enough money to give.",
"He is not convinced they will use it rightly.",
"He believes they can get help from the government."
]
| Why doesn't the author give money to street people? | Why I Don't Spare "Spare Change"
"Poor but honest." "The deserving poor." These words always come to my mind when I think of "the poor." But I also think of people who, perhaps through alcohol or drugs, have ruined not only their own lives but also the lives of others in order to give way to their own pleasure. Perhaps alcoholism and drug addiction really are "diseases," as many people say, but my own feeling - based. Of course, not on any serious study - is that most alcoholics and drug addicts belong to the "undeserving poor." And that is largely why I don't give spare change to beggars.
But surely among the street people there are also some who can rightly be called "deserving." Deserving what? My spare change? Or simply the government's assistance? It happens that I have been brought up to believe that it is proper to make contributions to charity , but if I give some change to a beggar, am I making a contribution to charity and thereby helping someone, or, am I perhaps simply encouraging someone not to get help? Or, maybe even worse, am I supporting a cheat?
If one believes in the value of private charity, one can either give to needy people or to charitable organizations. In giving to a beggar one may indeed be helping a person who badly needs help, but one cannot be certain that one is giving to a needy person. In giving to an organization, on the other hand, one can feel that one's money is likely to be used wisely. True, facing a beggar one may feel that this particular unfortunate person needs help at this moment - a cup of coffee or a sandwich - and the need will not be met unless I put my hand in my pocket right now. But I have come to think that the beggars whom I meet can get along without my spare change, and indeed perhaps they are actually better off for not having money to buy alcohol or drugs.
I know nothing about these beggars, but it's my impression that they simply prefer begging to working. I am not generalizing about street people. I am talking about the about whom I acturally meet. That's why I do not give "spare change," and I don't think I will in the future. | 3338.txt | 2 |
[
"asking questions for people to think about",
"giving examples to support his argument",
"raising questions and answering them",
"expressing his opinions directly"
]
| In the second paragraph, the author presents his idea by _ . | Why I Don't Spare "Spare Change"
"Poor but honest." "The deserving poor." These words always come to my mind when I think of "the poor." But I also think of people who, perhaps through alcohol or drugs, have ruined not only their own lives but also the lives of others in order to give way to their own pleasure. Perhaps alcoholism and drug addiction really are "diseases," as many people say, but my own feeling - based. Of course, not on any serious study - is that most alcoholics and drug addicts belong to the "undeserving poor." And that is largely why I don't give spare change to beggars.
But surely among the street people there are also some who can rightly be called "deserving." Deserving what? My spare change? Or simply the government's assistance? It happens that I have been brought up to believe that it is proper to make contributions to charity , but if I give some change to a beggar, am I making a contribution to charity and thereby helping someone, or, am I perhaps simply encouraging someone not to get help? Or, maybe even worse, am I supporting a cheat?
If one believes in the value of private charity, one can either give to needy people or to charitable organizations. In giving to a beggar one may indeed be helping a person who badly needs help, but one cannot be certain that one is giving to a needy person. In giving to an organization, on the other hand, one can feel that one's money is likely to be used wisely. True, facing a beggar one may feel that this particular unfortunate person needs help at this moment - a cup of coffee or a sandwich - and the need will not be met unless I put my hand in my pocket right now. But I have come to think that the beggars whom I meet can get along without my spare change, and indeed perhaps they are actually better off for not having money to buy alcohol or drugs.
I know nothing about these beggars, but it's my impression that they simply prefer begging to working. I am not generalizing about street people. I am talking about the about whom I acturally meet. That's why I do not give "spare change," and I don't think I will in the future. | 3338.txt | 0 |
[
"Drug addiction is a disease.",
"Some street people are poor and needy.",
"Most beggars have received enough help.",
"Charitable organizations handle money properly."
]
| Which of the following opinions does the author accept? | Why I Don't Spare "Spare Change"
"Poor but honest." "The deserving poor." These words always come to my mind when I think of "the poor." But I also think of people who, perhaps through alcohol or drugs, have ruined not only their own lives but also the lives of others in order to give way to their own pleasure. Perhaps alcoholism and drug addiction really are "diseases," as many people say, but my own feeling - based. Of course, not on any serious study - is that most alcoholics and drug addicts belong to the "undeserving poor." And that is largely why I don't give spare change to beggars.
But surely among the street people there are also some who can rightly be called "deserving." Deserving what? My spare change? Or simply the government's assistance? It happens that I have been brought up to believe that it is proper to make contributions to charity , but if I give some change to a beggar, am I making a contribution to charity and thereby helping someone, or, am I perhaps simply encouraging someone not to get help? Or, maybe even worse, am I supporting a cheat?
If one believes in the value of private charity, one can either give to needy people or to charitable organizations. In giving to a beggar one may indeed be helping a person who badly needs help, but one cannot be certain that one is giving to a needy person. In giving to an organization, on the other hand, one can feel that one's money is likely to be used wisely. True, facing a beggar one may feel that this particular unfortunate person needs help at this moment - a cup of coffee or a sandwich - and the need will not be met unless I put my hand in my pocket right now. But I have come to think that the beggars whom I meet can get along without my spare change, and indeed perhaps they are actually better off for not having money to buy alcohol or drugs.
I know nothing about these beggars, but it's my impression that they simply prefer begging to working. I am not generalizing about street people. I am talking about the about whom I acturally meet. That's why I do not give "spare change," and I don't think I will in the future. | 3338.txt | 1 |
[
"Their differences are very small.",
"The differences are very great.",
"There are no differences between them.",
"Some people think there are, but some people don't think so."
]
| What do you think of the differences between British and American people? | What do you think of British people and American people? You might think that there are no differences between the people in the two countries. After all they speak the same language, don't they? But if you ask a British or an American person, the differences are quite great.
What do British people think Americans are like? The British think Americans are very strange. They make a lot of noise and they laugh too loudly. They are rich, and they only think about money. But the British do say that Americans are kind, friendly people.They are happy to help you if you are in trouble.
What do Americans think of the British? Well, they think the British are cold and very unfriendly. They are not interested in success or in making lots of money. They think Britain is the best country in the world. They look down upon other countries. But Americans say that the British are quite good workers. They are brave and honest. And in time of trouble they face difficulties happily.
You can see that these ideas can cause misunderstanding between the British and Americans.But when American and British people become friends, they usually find things are not as bad as they expected. | 672.txt | 1 |
[
"They are strange but friendly.",
"They are poor.",
"They are rich but unfriendly.",
"They are happy in trouble."
]
| What do the British think Americans are like? | What do you think of British people and American people? You might think that there are no differences between the people in the two countries. After all they speak the same language, don't they? But if you ask a British or an American person, the differences are quite great.
What do British people think Americans are like? The British think Americans are very strange. They make a lot of noise and they laugh too loudly. They are rich, and they only think about money. But the British do say that Americans are kind, friendly people.They are happy to help you if you are in trouble.
What do Americans think of the British? Well, they think the British are cold and very unfriendly. They are not interested in success or in making lots of money. They think Britain is the best country in the world. They look down upon other countries. But Americans say that the British are quite good workers. They are brave and honest. And in time of trouble they face difficulties happily.
You can see that these ideas can cause misunderstanding between the British and Americans.But when American and British people become friends, they usually find things are not as bad as they expected. | 672.txt | 0 |
[
"when misunderstanding is caused between them",
"once they become friends",
"after they fight",
"when they help each other"
]
| The American and British people usually get along quite well _ . | What do you think of British people and American people? You might think that there are no differences between the people in the two countries. After all they speak the same language, don't they? But if you ask a British or an American person, the differences are quite great.
What do British people think Americans are like? The British think Americans are very strange. They make a lot of noise and they laugh too loudly. They are rich, and they only think about money. But the British do say that Americans are kind, friendly people.They are happy to help you if you are in trouble.
What do Americans think of the British? Well, they think the British are cold and very unfriendly. They are not interested in success or in making lots of money. They think Britain is the best country in the world. They look down upon other countries. But Americans say that the British are quite good workers. They are brave and honest. And in time of trouble they face difficulties happily.
You can see that these ideas can cause misunderstanding between the British and Americans.But when American and British people become friends, they usually find things are not as bad as they expected. | 672.txt | 1 |
[
"It is worthwhile after all.",
"It is simply a waste of time.",
"It is hard to say whether it is good or bad.",
"It is too expensive for most young people."
]
| What is the author's opinion of going to university? | What a waste of money!In return for an averageof£44,000 of debt,students get an average of only 14 hours of lecture and tutorial time a week in Britain. Annual fees have risen from£1,000 to $9,000 in the last decade. But contact time at university has barely risen at all. And graduating doesn't even provide any guarantee of a decent job:sixin ten graduates today are in non-graduate jobs.
No wonder it has become fashionable to denounce many universities as little more that elaboratecom-tricks. There's a lotfor students to complain about the repayment threshold for paying back loans will be frozen for five years, meaning that lower-paid graduals have to start repaying their loans, and maintenance grants have been replaced by loans meaning that students from poorer backgrounds face higher debt than those with wealthier parents.
Yet it still pays to go to university. If going to university doesn't work out, students pay very little-if any-of their tuition fees back, you only start repaying when you are earning £21, 000 a year. Almost half of graduates-those who go on to earn less-will have a portion of their debt written off. It's not just the lectures and tutorials that are important. Education is the sum of what students teach each other in between lectures and seminars. Students do not merely benefit while at university, studies show they go on to be healthier and happier than non-graduates, and also far more likely to vote.
Whatever your talents, it is extraordinarily difficult to get a leading job in most fields without having been to university. Recruiters circle elite universities like vulturous. Many top firms will not even look at applications from those who lack a 2.1, i.e., an upper-second class degree, from an elite university. Students at university also meet those likely to be in leading jobs in the future, forming contacts for life. This might not be right, but school-leavers who fail to acknowledge as much risk making the wrong decision about going to university.
Perhaps the reason why so many universities offer their students so little is they know studying at a top university remains a brilliant investment even if you don't learn anything .Studying at university will only become less attractive if employers shift their focus away from where someone went to university-and there is no sign of that happening anytime soon. School-leavers may moan, but they have little choice but to embrace university and the student debt that comes with it. | 1763.txt | 0 |
[
"Few of them are satisfied with the jobs they are offered.",
"It usually takes a long time for them to find a decent job.",
"Graduates from elite universities usually can get decent jobs.",
"Most of them take jobs which don't require a college degree."
]
| What does the author say about the employment situation of British university graduates? | What a waste of money!In return for an averageof£44,000 of debt,students get an average of only 14 hours of lecture and tutorial time a week in Britain. Annual fees have risen from£1,000 to $9,000 in the last decade. But contact time at university has barely risen at all. And graduating doesn't even provide any guarantee of a decent job:sixin ten graduates today are in non-graduate jobs.
No wonder it has become fashionable to denounce many universities as little more that elaboratecom-tricks. There's a lotfor students to complain about the repayment threshold for paying back loans will be frozen for five years, meaning that lower-paid graduals have to start repaying their loans, and maintenance grants have been replaced by loans meaning that students from poorer backgrounds face higher debt than those with wealthier parents.
Yet it still pays to go to university. If going to university doesn't work out, students pay very little-if any-of their tuition fees back, you only start repaying when you are earning £21, 000 a year. Almost half of graduates-those who go on to earn less-will have a portion of their debt written off. It's not just the lectures and tutorials that are important. Education is the sum of what students teach each other in between lectures and seminars. Students do not merely benefit while at university, studies show they go on to be healthier and happier than non-graduates, and also far more likely to vote.
Whatever your talents, it is extraordinarily difficult to get a leading job in most fields without having been to university. Recruiters circle elite universities like vulturous. Many top firms will not even look at applications from those who lack a 2.1, i.e., an upper-second class degree, from an elite university. Students at university also meet those likely to be in leading jobs in the future, forming contacts for life. This might not be right, but school-leavers who fail to acknowledge as much risk making the wrong decision about going to university.
Perhaps the reason why so many universities offer their students so little is they know studying at a top university remains a brilliant investment even if you don't learn anything .Studying at university will only become less attractive if employers shift their focus away from where someone went to university-and there is no sign of that happening anytime soon. School-leavers may moan, but they have little choice but to embrace university and the student debt that comes with it. | 1763.txt | 3 |
[
"Making sure to obtain an upper-second class degree.",
"Practical skills they will need in their future careers.",
"Interactions among themselves outside the classroom.",
"Developing independent and creative thinking abilities."
]
| What does the author say is important for university students besides classroom instruction? | What a waste of money!In return for an averageof£44,000 of debt,students get an average of only 14 hours of lecture and tutorial time a week in Britain. Annual fees have risen from£1,000 to $9,000 in the last decade. But contact time at university has barely risen at all. And graduating doesn't even provide any guarantee of a decent job:sixin ten graduates today are in non-graduate jobs.
No wonder it has become fashionable to denounce many universities as little more that elaboratecom-tricks. There's a lotfor students to complain about the repayment threshold for paying back loans will be frozen for five years, meaning that lower-paid graduals have to start repaying their loans, and maintenance grants have been replaced by loans meaning that students from poorer backgrounds face higher debt than those with wealthier parents.
Yet it still pays to go to university. If going to university doesn't work out, students pay very little-if any-of their tuition fees back, you only start repaying when you are earning £21, 000 a year. Almost half of graduates-those who go on to earn less-will have a portion of their debt written off. It's not just the lectures and tutorials that are important. Education is the sum of what students teach each other in between lectures and seminars. Students do not merely benefit while at university, studies show they go on to be healthier and happier than non-graduates, and also far more likely to vote.
Whatever your talents, it is extraordinarily difficult to get a leading job in most fields without having been to university. Recruiters circle elite universities like vulturous. Many top firms will not even look at applications from those who lack a 2.1, i.e., an upper-second class degree, from an elite university. Students at university also meet those likely to be in leading jobs in the future, forming contacts for life. This might not be right, but school-leavers who fail to acknowledge as much risk making the wrong decision about going to university.
Perhaps the reason why so many universities offer their students so little is they know studying at a top university remains a brilliant investment even if you don't learn anything .Studying at university will only become less attractive if employers shift their focus away from where someone went to university-and there is no sign of that happening anytime soon. School-leavers may moan, but they have little choice but to embrace university and the student debt that comes with it. | 1763.txt | 2 |
[
"Learning how to take risks in an ever-changing world.",
"Meeting people who will be helpful to you in the future.",
"Having opportunities of playing a leading role in society.",
"Gaining up-to-date knowledge in science and technology."
]
| What is said to be an advantage of going to university? | What a waste of money!In return for an averageof£44,000 of debt,students get an average of only 14 hours of lecture and tutorial time a week in Britain. Annual fees have risen from£1,000 to $9,000 in the last decade. But contact time at university has barely risen at all. And graduating doesn't even provide any guarantee of a decent job:sixin ten graduates today are in non-graduate jobs.
No wonder it has become fashionable to denounce many universities as little more that elaboratecom-tricks. There's a lotfor students to complain about the repayment threshold for paying back loans will be frozen for five years, meaning that lower-paid graduals have to start repaying their loans, and maintenance grants have been replaced by loans meaning that students from poorer backgrounds face higher debt than those with wealthier parents.
Yet it still pays to go to university. If going to university doesn't work out, students pay very little-if any-of their tuition fees back, you only start repaying when you are earning £21, 000 a year. Almost half of graduates-those who go on to earn less-will have a portion of their debt written off. It's not just the lectures and tutorials that are important. Education is the sum of what students teach each other in between lectures and seminars. Students do not merely benefit while at university, studies show they go on to be healthier and happier than non-graduates, and also far more likely to vote.
Whatever your talents, it is extraordinarily difficult to get a leading job in most fields without having been to university. Recruiters circle elite universities like vulturous. Many top firms will not even look at applications from those who lack a 2.1, i.e., an upper-second class degree, from an elite university. Students at university also meet those likely to be in leading jobs in the future, forming contacts for life. This might not be right, but school-leavers who fail to acknowledge as much risk making the wrong decision about going to university.
Perhaps the reason why so many universities offer their students so little is they know studying at a top university remains a brilliant investment even if you don't learn anything .Studying at university will only become less attractive if employers shift their focus away from where someone went to university-and there is no sign of that happening anytime soon. School-leavers may moan, but they have little choice but to embrace university and the student debt that comes with it. | 1763.txt | 1 |
[
"It is natural for students to make complaints about university education.",
"Few students are willing to bear the burden of debt incurred at university.",
"University education is becoming attractive to students who can afford it.",
"The prestige of the university influences employers' recruitment decisions."
]
| What can we infer from the last paragraph? | What a waste of money!In return for an averageof£44,000 of debt,students get an average of only 14 hours of lecture and tutorial time a week in Britain. Annual fees have risen from£1,000 to $9,000 in the last decade. But contact time at university has barely risen at all. And graduating doesn't even provide any guarantee of a decent job:sixin ten graduates today are in non-graduate jobs.
No wonder it has become fashionable to denounce many universities as little more that elaboratecom-tricks. There's a lotfor students to complain about the repayment threshold for paying back loans will be frozen for five years, meaning that lower-paid graduals have to start repaying their loans, and maintenance grants have been replaced by loans meaning that students from poorer backgrounds face higher debt than those with wealthier parents.
Yet it still pays to go to university. If going to university doesn't work out, students pay very little-if any-of their tuition fees back, you only start repaying when you are earning £21, 000 a year. Almost half of graduates-those who go on to earn less-will have a portion of their debt written off. It's not just the lectures and tutorials that are important. Education is the sum of what students teach each other in between lectures and seminars. Students do not merely benefit while at university, studies show they go on to be healthier and happier than non-graduates, and also far more likely to vote.
Whatever your talents, it is extraordinarily difficult to get a leading job in most fields without having been to university. Recruiters circle elite universities like vulturous. Many top firms will not even look at applications from those who lack a 2.1, i.e., an upper-second class degree, from an elite university. Students at university also meet those likely to be in leading jobs in the future, forming contacts for life. This might not be right, but school-leavers who fail to acknowledge as much risk making the wrong decision about going to university.
Perhaps the reason why so many universities offer their students so little is they know studying at a top university remains a brilliant investment even if you don't learn anything .Studying at university will only become less attractive if employers shift their focus away from where someone went to university-and there is no sign of that happening anytime soon. School-leavers may moan, but they have little choice but to embrace university and the student debt that comes with it. | 1763.txt | 3 |
[
"By selling its intellectual property.",
"By doing what it is good at.",
"By releasing the free source-code.",
"By severe competition with Microsoft."
]
| What is the RealNetworks' new way of stopping Microsoft? | Focus on what you do best. This age-old strategy has worked well for RealNetworks, Microsoft's main competitor in multimedia software for the Internet. Now, the smaller Seattle-based firm is trying a novel way to contain the software giant. On October 29th, it released the underlying recipe, or source-code, of its RealPlayer software and will soon do the same for its other programs-giving away a big chunk of its intellectual property.
This may sound like a desperate echo of 1998, when Netscape, struggling in Microsoft's chokehold, published the source-code of its web browser (an initiative that yielded few real results until this June, when the first serious new version of the open-source browser, Mozilla, was releaseD. Yet RealNetworks is not playing defence. It is trying to encourage the creation of a common multimedia software infrastructure for every kind of file format and device, thus thwarting Microsoft's ambitions in this promising market.
The firm hopes that others in the industry（volunteer programmers, media firms and hardware makers）will take the code, called Helix DNA, improve it and make it run on new devices, such as mobile phones and home stereos, turning RealNetworks' software into an industry standard. Clever licensing terms are supposed to ensure that this standard does not splinter and that the firm still makes money.
Individual developers, universities and other non-profit organisations can modify the software as they please, and even redistribute it for free, so long as they also publish the source-code for their changes. This is a sort of payment in kind, for RealNetworks is then allowed to use these contributions. Firms, on the other hand, must pay royalty fees if they distribute more than 1m copies of the code. They also have to make sure that their software works with other Helix DNA products. The software's development community already has 2,000 members. And several hardware makers back the effort. But there are risks. Afraid of piracy, media groups are suspicious of anything that might be related to hackers（although they also do not want to depend on, and pay for, technology controlled by Microsoft）. The self-created competition could also hurt RealNetworks if customers decide its commercial products, which will be based on the open source-code but with extra features, are not worth paying extra for.
RealNetworks' move is another sign that the software industry is going hybrid. Mixing elements of proprietary software, where the source-code is tightly controlled, with open-source programs enables firms to expand a market, harvest the ideas of others and, they hope, still make money. Even Microsoft is edging this way: it recently announced that partners can now look at-but not modify or reuse-the source-code for Passport, its controversial digital-identity service. | 441.txt | 2 |
[
"It can bring about self-created competition.",
"It can defeat Microsoft's ambitions in this market.",
"It can use the improved software.",
"It can get royalty fees from some firms."
]
| Which of the following can be a disadvantage of releasing the source-code? | Focus on what you do best. This age-old strategy has worked well for RealNetworks, Microsoft's main competitor in multimedia software for the Internet. Now, the smaller Seattle-based firm is trying a novel way to contain the software giant. On October 29th, it released the underlying recipe, or source-code, of its RealPlayer software and will soon do the same for its other programs-giving away a big chunk of its intellectual property.
This may sound like a desperate echo of 1998, when Netscape, struggling in Microsoft's chokehold, published the source-code of its web browser (an initiative that yielded few real results until this June, when the first serious new version of the open-source browser, Mozilla, was releaseD. Yet RealNetworks is not playing defence. It is trying to encourage the creation of a common multimedia software infrastructure for every kind of file format and device, thus thwarting Microsoft's ambitions in this promising market.
The firm hopes that others in the industry（volunteer programmers, media firms and hardware makers）will take the code, called Helix DNA, improve it and make it run on new devices, such as mobile phones and home stereos, turning RealNetworks' software into an industry standard. Clever licensing terms are supposed to ensure that this standard does not splinter and that the firm still makes money.
Individual developers, universities and other non-profit organisations can modify the software as they please, and even redistribute it for free, so long as they also publish the source-code for their changes. This is a sort of payment in kind, for RealNetworks is then allowed to use these contributions. Firms, on the other hand, must pay royalty fees if they distribute more than 1m copies of the code. They also have to make sure that their software works with other Helix DNA products. The software's development community already has 2,000 members. And several hardware makers back the effort. But there are risks. Afraid of piracy, media groups are suspicious of anything that might be related to hackers（although they also do not want to depend on, and pay for, technology controlled by Microsoft）. The self-created competition could also hurt RealNetworks if customers decide its commercial products, which will be based on the open source-code but with extra features, are not worth paying extra for.
RealNetworks' move is another sign that the software industry is going hybrid. Mixing elements of proprietary software, where the source-code is tightly controlled, with open-source programs enables firms to expand a market, harvest the ideas of others and, they hope, still make money. Even Microsoft is edging this way: it recently announced that partners can now look at-but not modify or reuse-the source-code for Passport, its controversial digital-identity service. | 441.txt | 0 |
[
"a useless repetition",
"a poor resemblance",
"a shabby product",
"a dangerous copy"
]
| The expression" a desperate echo" （Line 1, Paragraph 2）most probably means _ . | Focus on what you do best. This age-old strategy has worked well for RealNetworks, Microsoft's main competitor in multimedia software for the Internet. Now, the smaller Seattle-based firm is trying a novel way to contain the software giant. On October 29th, it released the underlying recipe, or source-code, of its RealPlayer software and will soon do the same for its other programs-giving away a big chunk of its intellectual property.
This may sound like a desperate echo of 1998, when Netscape, struggling in Microsoft's chokehold, published the source-code of its web browser (an initiative that yielded few real results until this June, when the first serious new version of the open-source browser, Mozilla, was releaseD. Yet RealNetworks is not playing defence. It is trying to encourage the creation of a common multimedia software infrastructure for every kind of file format and device, thus thwarting Microsoft's ambitions in this promising market.
The firm hopes that others in the industry（volunteer programmers, media firms and hardware makers）will take the code, called Helix DNA, improve it and make it run on new devices, such as mobile phones and home stereos, turning RealNetworks' software into an industry standard. Clever licensing terms are supposed to ensure that this standard does not splinter and that the firm still makes money.
Individual developers, universities and other non-profit organisations can modify the software as they please, and even redistribute it for free, so long as they also publish the source-code for their changes. This is a sort of payment in kind, for RealNetworks is then allowed to use these contributions. Firms, on the other hand, must pay royalty fees if they distribute more than 1m copies of the code. They also have to make sure that their software works with other Helix DNA products. The software's development community already has 2,000 members. And several hardware makers back the effort. But there are risks. Afraid of piracy, media groups are suspicious of anything that might be related to hackers（although they also do not want to depend on, and pay for, technology controlled by Microsoft）. The self-created competition could also hurt RealNetworks if customers decide its commercial products, which will be based on the open source-code but with extra features, are not worth paying extra for.
RealNetworks' move is another sign that the software industry is going hybrid. Mixing elements of proprietary software, where the source-code is tightly controlled, with open-source programs enables firms to expand a market, harvest the ideas of others and, they hope, still make money. Even Microsoft is edging this way: it recently announced that partners can now look at-but not modify or reuse-the source-code for Passport, its controversial digital-identity service. | 441.txt | 3 |
[
"Microsoft fails to control the software market.",
"Software market is becoming a mixed market.",
"RealNetworks wants to make more money.",
"Software market is not fixed or stable."
]
| What does the move of RealNetworks suggest? | Focus on what you do best. This age-old strategy has worked well for RealNetworks, Microsoft's main competitor in multimedia software for the Internet. Now, the smaller Seattle-based firm is trying a novel way to contain the software giant. On October 29th, it released the underlying recipe, or source-code, of its RealPlayer software and will soon do the same for its other programs-giving away a big chunk of its intellectual property.
This may sound like a desperate echo of 1998, when Netscape, struggling in Microsoft's chokehold, published the source-code of its web browser (an initiative that yielded few real results until this June, when the first serious new version of the open-source browser, Mozilla, was releaseD. Yet RealNetworks is not playing defence. It is trying to encourage the creation of a common multimedia software infrastructure for every kind of file format and device, thus thwarting Microsoft's ambitions in this promising market.
The firm hopes that others in the industry（volunteer programmers, media firms and hardware makers）will take the code, called Helix DNA, improve it and make it run on new devices, such as mobile phones and home stereos, turning RealNetworks' software into an industry standard. Clever licensing terms are supposed to ensure that this standard does not splinter and that the firm still makes money.
Individual developers, universities and other non-profit organisations can modify the software as they please, and even redistribute it for free, so long as they also publish the source-code for their changes. This is a sort of payment in kind, for RealNetworks is then allowed to use these contributions. Firms, on the other hand, must pay royalty fees if they distribute more than 1m copies of the code. They also have to make sure that their software works with other Helix DNA products. The software's development community already has 2,000 members. And several hardware makers back the effort. But there are risks. Afraid of piracy, media groups are suspicious of anything that might be related to hackers（although they also do not want to depend on, and pay for, technology controlled by Microsoft）. The self-created competition could also hurt RealNetworks if customers decide its commercial products, which will be based on the open source-code but with extra features, are not worth paying extra for.
RealNetworks' move is another sign that the software industry is going hybrid. Mixing elements of proprietary software, where the source-code is tightly controlled, with open-source programs enables firms to expand a market, harvest the ideas of others and, they hope, still make money. Even Microsoft is edging this way: it recently announced that partners can now look at-but not modify or reuse-the source-code for Passport, its controversial digital-identity service. | 441.txt | 1 |
[
"Netscape had a sheer failure for its publishing the source-code.",
"RealNetworks wants to occupy the source-code market.",
"RealNetworks wants to make profits by releasing the free source-code.",
"Microsoft has to change its managing strategy."
]
| Which of the following is TRUE according to the text? | Focus on what you do best. This age-old strategy has worked well for RealNetworks, Microsoft's main competitor in multimedia software for the Internet. Now, the smaller Seattle-based firm is trying a novel way to contain the software giant. On October 29th, it released the underlying recipe, or source-code, of its RealPlayer software and will soon do the same for its other programs-giving away a big chunk of its intellectual property.
This may sound like a desperate echo of 1998, when Netscape, struggling in Microsoft's chokehold, published the source-code of its web browser (an initiative that yielded few real results until this June, when the first serious new version of the open-source browser, Mozilla, was releaseD. Yet RealNetworks is not playing defence. It is trying to encourage the creation of a common multimedia software infrastructure for every kind of file format and device, thus thwarting Microsoft's ambitions in this promising market.
The firm hopes that others in the industry（volunteer programmers, media firms and hardware makers）will take the code, called Helix DNA, improve it and make it run on new devices, such as mobile phones and home stereos, turning RealNetworks' software into an industry standard. Clever licensing terms are supposed to ensure that this standard does not splinter and that the firm still makes money.
Individual developers, universities and other non-profit organisations can modify the software as they please, and even redistribute it for free, so long as they also publish the source-code for their changes. This is a sort of payment in kind, for RealNetworks is then allowed to use these contributions. Firms, on the other hand, must pay royalty fees if they distribute more than 1m copies of the code. They also have to make sure that their software works with other Helix DNA products. The software's development community already has 2,000 members. And several hardware makers back the effort. But there are risks. Afraid of piracy, media groups are suspicious of anything that might be related to hackers（although they also do not want to depend on, and pay for, technology controlled by Microsoft）. The self-created competition could also hurt RealNetworks if customers decide its commercial products, which will be based on the open source-code but with extra features, are not worth paying extra for.
RealNetworks' move is another sign that the software industry is going hybrid. Mixing elements of proprietary software, where the source-code is tightly controlled, with open-source programs enables firms to expand a market, harvest the ideas of others and, they hope, still make money. Even Microsoft is edging this way: it recently announced that partners can now look at-but not modify or reuse-the source-code for Passport, its controversial digital-identity service. | 441.txt | 2 |
[
"it could improve sleep quality of patients.",
"it could increase the level of oxygen in the patients' blood.",
"it could lower the risk of the occurrence of sleep apnea.",
"it could both help the patient to get more sleep and lost weight"
]
| The air contraption should help patients avoid car accidents because _ | It's normal for your muscles to lose tone when you sleep-that's why people in meetings nod off so amusingly. But in as many as 10 percent of middle-aged and older adults, the throat muscles relax so much that the airway repeatedly closes up, a condition that can be deadly, as it turns out. According to a study published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine, obstructive sleep apnea sharply increases the risk of stroke or death.
People with sleep apnea often don't realize they have it, since they don't remember waking up again and again, gasping for breath. Often, it's a bed partner who hears the choking and "industrial-strength snoring," says Klar Yaggi, a sleep specialist at Yale who led the study. He and his colleagues followed two groups of patients who were tested for sleep apnea (defined as stopping breathing five or more times per hour). Some had the condition; some didn't. During the 3½ years or so that they were studied, the people with sleep apnea were about twice as likely to have a stroke or die.
No one really knows why, although the explanation could have to do with the spikes of adrenaline that course through the body when breathing stops, increasing blood pressure, or with repeated plunges in the level of oxygen in the blood. This study didn't look at whether treatment-sleeping with a contraption that continuously blows air into the mouth-lowers risk. But losing weight will improve sleep apnea. And patients who use the machine get much more rest, Yaggi says, which should help them avoid one of the other major dangers of sleep apnea: car accidents.
Another study in the same issue of the New England Journal looked at how well the continuous air treatment works for people with central sleep apnea, a different disorder altogether. In both forms of sleep apnea, you stop breathing periodically. But in central sleep apnea, the problem is not an obstructed airway but that the brain fails to send out the command to breathe. The disorder is usually caused by congestive heart failure, in which the heart doesn't pump as well as it should and fluid collects in the chest. Researchers think that providing a continuous air flow during sleep might help drive water out of the lungs and make breathing more regular.
The treatment did help people with central sleep apnea in some ways: Their hearts worked better, they didn't stop breathing as often, they didn't have adrenaline surges, and they were able to exercise more. "That's the good news," says Douglas Bradley, a pulmonologist at the University of Toronto and author of the article. "The bad news is that we didn't improve survival."
The treated patients weren't any less likely to die in the follow-up period than those who were not given the treatment. While Bradley suspects a larger study would prove a lower risk of dying, he says the benefits shown in this study aren't significant enough to recommend using the treatment routinely in people with central sleep apnea. | 3530.txt | 0 |
[
"The study proves that the machine could help the patients avoid car accidents.",
"The study verifies that losing weight could lowers risk of sleep apnea.",
"The study did not provide a definite answer to the cause of sleep apnea.",
"The study argues that people with sleep apnea have more risks of death."
]
| Which one of the following statements is NOT true of Yaggi's study? | It's normal for your muscles to lose tone when you sleep-that's why people in meetings nod off so amusingly. But in as many as 10 percent of middle-aged and older adults, the throat muscles relax so much that the airway repeatedly closes up, a condition that can be deadly, as it turns out. According to a study published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine, obstructive sleep apnea sharply increases the risk of stroke or death.
People with sleep apnea often don't realize they have it, since they don't remember waking up again and again, gasping for breath. Often, it's a bed partner who hears the choking and "industrial-strength snoring," says Klar Yaggi, a sleep specialist at Yale who led the study. He and his colleagues followed two groups of patients who were tested for sleep apnea (defined as stopping breathing five or more times per hour). Some had the condition; some didn't. During the 3½ years or so that they were studied, the people with sleep apnea were about twice as likely to have a stroke or die.
No one really knows why, although the explanation could have to do with the spikes of adrenaline that course through the body when breathing stops, increasing blood pressure, or with repeated plunges in the level of oxygen in the blood. This study didn't look at whether treatment-sleeping with a contraption that continuously blows air into the mouth-lowers risk. But losing weight will improve sleep apnea. And patients who use the machine get much more rest, Yaggi says, which should help them avoid one of the other major dangers of sleep apnea: car accidents.
Another study in the same issue of the New England Journal looked at how well the continuous air treatment works for people with central sleep apnea, a different disorder altogether. In both forms of sleep apnea, you stop breathing periodically. But in central sleep apnea, the problem is not an obstructed airway but that the brain fails to send out the command to breathe. The disorder is usually caused by congestive heart failure, in which the heart doesn't pump as well as it should and fluid collects in the chest. Researchers think that providing a continuous air flow during sleep might help drive water out of the lungs and make breathing more regular.
The treatment did help people with central sleep apnea in some ways: Their hearts worked better, they didn't stop breathing as often, they didn't have adrenaline surges, and they were able to exercise more. "That's the good news," says Douglas Bradley, a pulmonologist at the University of Toronto and author of the article. "The bad news is that we didn't improve survival."
The treated patients weren't any less likely to die in the follow-up period than those who were not given the treatment. While Bradley suspects a larger study would prove a lower risk of dying, he says the benefits shown in this study aren't significant enough to recommend using the treatment routinely in people with central sleep apnea. | 3530.txt | 0 |
[
"Both of them belong to the category of periodical disorder in breathing.",
"Both of them are still hard for patients to survive from.",
"Both of them share the same cause that is rooted in the brain system.",
"Both of them could be effectively dealt with by the new treatment"
]
| Which one of the following is the common characteristic sleep apnea and central sleep apnea have in common? | It's normal for your muscles to lose tone when you sleep-that's why people in meetings nod off so amusingly. But in as many as 10 percent of middle-aged and older adults, the throat muscles relax so much that the airway repeatedly closes up, a condition that can be deadly, as it turns out. According to a study published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine, obstructive sleep apnea sharply increases the risk of stroke or death.
People with sleep apnea often don't realize they have it, since they don't remember waking up again and again, gasping for breath. Often, it's a bed partner who hears the choking and "industrial-strength snoring," says Klar Yaggi, a sleep specialist at Yale who led the study. He and his colleagues followed two groups of patients who were tested for sleep apnea (defined as stopping breathing five or more times per hour). Some had the condition; some didn't. During the 3½ years or so that they were studied, the people with sleep apnea were about twice as likely to have a stroke or die.
No one really knows why, although the explanation could have to do with the spikes of adrenaline that course through the body when breathing stops, increasing blood pressure, or with repeated plunges in the level of oxygen in the blood. This study didn't look at whether treatment-sleeping with a contraption that continuously blows air into the mouth-lowers risk. But losing weight will improve sleep apnea. And patients who use the machine get much more rest, Yaggi says, which should help them avoid one of the other major dangers of sleep apnea: car accidents.
Another study in the same issue of the New England Journal looked at how well the continuous air treatment works for people with central sleep apnea, a different disorder altogether. In both forms of sleep apnea, you stop breathing periodically. But in central sleep apnea, the problem is not an obstructed airway but that the brain fails to send out the command to breathe. The disorder is usually caused by congestive heart failure, in which the heart doesn't pump as well as it should and fluid collects in the chest. Researchers think that providing a continuous air flow during sleep might help drive water out of the lungs and make breathing more regular.
The treatment did help people with central sleep apnea in some ways: Their hearts worked better, they didn't stop breathing as often, they didn't have adrenaline surges, and they were able to exercise more. "That's the good news," says Douglas Bradley, a pulmonologist at the University of Toronto and author of the article. "The bad news is that we didn't improve survival."
The treated patients weren't any less likely to die in the follow-up period than those who were not given the treatment. While Bradley suspects a larger study would prove a lower risk of dying, he says the benefits shown in this study aren't significant enough to recommend using the treatment routinely in people with central sleep apnea. | 3530.txt | 2 |
[
"The air treatment works positively in improving.",
"The central apnea is caused by congestive heart failure.",
"The air treatment could help the brain to work better.",
"The death risk is strongly suppressed by the application of air treatment."
]
| The study conducted by Douglas Bradley proves the following except _ | It's normal for your muscles to lose tone when you sleep-that's why people in meetings nod off so amusingly. But in as many as 10 percent of middle-aged and older adults, the throat muscles relax so much that the airway repeatedly closes up, a condition that can be deadly, as it turns out. According to a study published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine, obstructive sleep apnea sharply increases the risk of stroke or death.
People with sleep apnea often don't realize they have it, since they don't remember waking up again and again, gasping for breath. Often, it's a bed partner who hears the choking and "industrial-strength snoring," says Klar Yaggi, a sleep specialist at Yale who led the study. He and his colleagues followed two groups of patients who were tested for sleep apnea (defined as stopping breathing five or more times per hour). Some had the condition; some didn't. During the 3½ years or so that they were studied, the people with sleep apnea were about twice as likely to have a stroke or die.
No one really knows why, although the explanation could have to do with the spikes of adrenaline that course through the body when breathing stops, increasing blood pressure, or with repeated plunges in the level of oxygen in the blood. This study didn't look at whether treatment-sleeping with a contraption that continuously blows air into the mouth-lowers risk. But losing weight will improve sleep apnea. And patients who use the machine get much more rest, Yaggi says, which should help them avoid one of the other major dangers of sleep apnea: car accidents.
Another study in the same issue of the New England Journal looked at how well the continuous air treatment works for people with central sleep apnea, a different disorder altogether. In both forms of sleep apnea, you stop breathing periodically. But in central sleep apnea, the problem is not an obstructed airway but that the brain fails to send out the command to breathe. The disorder is usually caused by congestive heart failure, in which the heart doesn't pump as well as it should and fluid collects in the chest. Researchers think that providing a continuous air flow during sleep might help drive water out of the lungs and make breathing more regular.
The treatment did help people with central sleep apnea in some ways: Their hearts worked better, they didn't stop breathing as often, they didn't have adrenaline surges, and they were able to exercise more. "That's the good news," says Douglas Bradley, a pulmonologist at the University of Toronto and author of the article. "The bad news is that we didn't improve survival."
The treated patients weren't any less likely to die in the follow-up period than those who were not given the treatment. While Bradley suspects a larger study would prove a lower risk of dying, he says the benefits shown in this study aren't significant enough to recommend using the treatment routinely in people with central sleep apnea. | 3530.txt | 1 |
[
"The study they have carried out is not authoritative enough.",
"The air treatment proves to have no improvement on survival.",
"The study they have carried out is not large enough.",
"The treatment needs further verification."
]
| Bradley thinks the treatment could not be used routinely in people with central sleep apnea because _ | It's normal for your muscles to lose tone when you sleep-that's why people in meetings nod off so amusingly. But in as many as 10 percent of middle-aged and older adults, the throat muscles relax so much that the airway repeatedly closes up, a condition that can be deadly, as it turns out. According to a study published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine, obstructive sleep apnea sharply increases the risk of stroke or death.
People with sleep apnea often don't realize they have it, since they don't remember waking up again and again, gasping for breath. Often, it's a bed partner who hears the choking and "industrial-strength snoring," says Klar Yaggi, a sleep specialist at Yale who led the study. He and his colleagues followed two groups of patients who were tested for sleep apnea (defined as stopping breathing five or more times per hour). Some had the condition; some didn't. During the 3½ years or so that they were studied, the people with sleep apnea were about twice as likely to have a stroke or die.
No one really knows why, although the explanation could have to do with the spikes of adrenaline that course through the body when breathing stops, increasing blood pressure, or with repeated plunges in the level of oxygen in the blood. This study didn't look at whether treatment-sleeping with a contraption that continuously blows air into the mouth-lowers risk. But losing weight will improve sleep apnea. And patients who use the machine get much more rest, Yaggi says, which should help them avoid one of the other major dangers of sleep apnea: car accidents.
Another study in the same issue of the New England Journal looked at how well the continuous air treatment works for people with central sleep apnea, a different disorder altogether. In both forms of sleep apnea, you stop breathing periodically. But in central sleep apnea, the problem is not an obstructed airway but that the brain fails to send out the command to breathe. The disorder is usually caused by congestive heart failure, in which the heart doesn't pump as well as it should and fluid collects in the chest. Researchers think that providing a continuous air flow during sleep might help drive water out of the lungs and make breathing more regular.
The treatment did help people with central sleep apnea in some ways: Their hearts worked better, they didn't stop breathing as often, they didn't have adrenaline surges, and they were able to exercise more. "That's the good news," says Douglas Bradley, a pulmonologist at the University of Toronto and author of the article. "The bad news is that we didn't improve survival."
The treated patients weren't any less likely to die in the follow-up period than those who were not given the treatment. While Bradley suspects a larger study would prove a lower risk of dying, he says the benefits shown in this study aren't significant enough to recommend using the treatment routinely in people with central sleep apnea. | 3530.txt | 3 |
[
"Robert's department's programmes.",
"EBC programmes.",
"EBC money.",
"both B and"
]
| In the story the Financial Controller was a person who was in charge of | The man sitting opposite Robert was the Financial Controller. Everybody called him "the FC" for short. He made all the decisions about money. Robert needed some more. That was why he had to see him. The two men did not get on very well. In fact, they had always disliked each other.
"Your request is out of the question," the FC said. Robert had difficulty in controlling himself, but he managed somehow. He explained that he wanted the money in order to make more programmes.
"And why do you want to do that?" the FC asked sharply. Again, Robert almost lost his temper. "Because more and more people are listening to my department's programmes. There's great demand for them," he answered.
The FC did not seem to believe him. But Robert had a report on the numbers of listeners to all EBC programmes. The FC became less confident . Robert threw the report down on the table and told him to read it.
The FC looked at it in silence. The figures proved that he had been wrong, but he did not want to admit it. "Well,"he finally said, "I may have made a small mistake."Robert noticed the word "may." He got up to leave. But he had the feeling that he would get the money after all. | 1717.txt | 2 |
[
"without any question",
"with some question.",
"impossible.",
"possible."
]
| "Your request is out of the question."Here "out of the question"means | The man sitting opposite Robert was the Financial Controller. Everybody called him "the FC" for short. He made all the decisions about money. Robert needed some more. That was why he had to see him. The two men did not get on very well. In fact, they had always disliked each other.
"Your request is out of the question," the FC said. Robert had difficulty in controlling himself, but he managed somehow. He explained that he wanted the money in order to make more programmes.
"And why do you want to do that?" the FC asked sharply. Again, Robert almost lost his temper. "Because more and more people are listening to my department's programmes. There's great demand for them," he answered.
The FC did not seem to believe him. But Robert had a report on the numbers of listeners to all EBC programmes. The FC became less confident . Robert threw the report down on the table and told him to read it.
The FC looked at it in silence. The figures proved that he had been wrong, but he did not want to admit it. "Well,"he finally said, "I may have made a small mistake."Robert noticed the word "may." He got up to leave. But he had the feeling that he would get the money after all. | 1717.txt | 2 |
[
"he wanted to meet the needs of the listeners.",
"\"the FC\"disliked him",
"the members of his department wanted him to do so.",
"he wanted to show himself off."
]
| Robert decided to make more programmes because | The man sitting opposite Robert was the Financial Controller. Everybody called him "the FC" for short. He made all the decisions about money. Robert needed some more. That was why he had to see him. The two men did not get on very well. In fact, they had always disliked each other.
"Your request is out of the question," the FC said. Robert had difficulty in controlling himself, but he managed somehow. He explained that he wanted the money in order to make more programmes.
"And why do you want to do that?" the FC asked sharply. Again, Robert almost lost his temper. "Because more and more people are listening to my department's programmes. There's great demand for them," he answered.
The FC did not seem to believe him. But Robert had a report on the numbers of listeners to all EBC programmes. The FC became less confident . Robert threw the report down on the table and told him to read it.
The FC looked at it in silence. The figures proved that he had been wrong, but he did not want to admit it. "Well,"he finally said, "I may have made a small mistake."Robert noticed the word "may." He got up to leave. But he had the feeling that he would get the money after all. | 1717.txt | 0 |
[
"Because he always lost his temper .",
"Because he disliked \"the FC.\"",
"Because the programmes were rich and to the taste of the listeners.",
"We don't know."
]
| Why were more and more people listening to Robert's programmes? | The man sitting opposite Robert was the Financial Controller. Everybody called him "the FC" for short. He made all the decisions about money. Robert needed some more. That was why he had to see him. The two men did not get on very well. In fact, they had always disliked each other.
"Your request is out of the question," the FC said. Robert had difficulty in controlling himself, but he managed somehow. He explained that he wanted the money in order to make more programmes.
"And why do you want to do that?" the FC asked sharply. Again, Robert almost lost his temper. "Because more and more people are listening to my department's programmes. There's great demand for them," he answered.
The FC did not seem to believe him. But Robert had a report on the numbers of listeners to all EBC programmes. The FC became less confident . Robert threw the report down on the table and told him to read it.
The FC looked at it in silence. The figures proved that he had been wrong, but he did not want to admit it. "Well,"he finally said, "I may have made a small mistake."Robert noticed the word "may." He got up to leave. But he had the feeling that he would get the money after all. | 1717.txt | 2 |
[
"The Financial Controller.",
"Robert.",
"Nobody.",
"The listeners."
]
| Who do you think won the argumentin the end? | The man sitting opposite Robert was the Financial Controller. Everybody called him "the FC" for short. He made all the decisions about money. Robert needed some more. That was why he had to see him. The two men did not get on very well. In fact, they had always disliked each other.
"Your request is out of the question," the FC said. Robert had difficulty in controlling himself, but he managed somehow. He explained that he wanted the money in order to make more programmes.
"And why do you want to do that?" the FC asked sharply. Again, Robert almost lost his temper. "Because more and more people are listening to my department's programmes. There's great demand for them," he answered.
The FC did not seem to believe him. But Robert had a report on the numbers of listeners to all EBC programmes. The FC became less confident . Robert threw the report down on the table and told him to read it.
The FC looked at it in silence. The figures proved that he had been wrong, but he did not want to admit it. "Well,"he finally said, "I may have made a small mistake."Robert noticed the word "may." He got up to leave. But he had the feeling that he would get the money after all. | 1717.txt | 1 |
[
"Post-vacation happiness",
"Pre-vacation planning",
"Influence to vacations",
"Research on vacations"
]
| What's the best title for this passage? | Vacations are a chance to take a break from work, see the world and enjoy time with family. But do they make you happier?
Researchers from the Netherlands set out to measure the effect that vacations have on overall happiness and how long it lasts. They studied happiness levels among 1,530 Dutch adults, 974 of whom took a vacation during the 32-week study period. The study showed that the largest lift in happiness comes from the simple act of planning a vacation. In the study, the effect of vacation anticipation lifted happiness for eight weeks.
After the vacation, happiness quickly dropped back to baseline levels for most people. How much stress or relaxation a traveler experienced on the trip appeared to influence post-vacation happiness. There was no post-trip happiness benefit for travelers who said the vacation was "neutral" or stressful."
Surprisingly, even those travelers who described the trip as "relaxing" showed no additional jump in happiness after the trip. "They were no happier than people who had not been on holiday," said the lead author, Jeroen Nawijn, tourism research lecturer at Breda University. The only vacationers who experienced an increase in happiness after the trip were those who reported feeling "very relaxed" on their vacation. Among those people, the vacation happiness effect lasted for just two weeks after the trip before returning to baseline levels.
One reason vacations don't increase happiness after the trip may have to do with the stress of returning to work. And for some travelers, the holiday itself was stressful. "In comments from people, the thing they mentioned most referred to disagreements with a travel partner or being ill," Mr. Nawijn said.
The study didn't find any relationship between the length of the vacation and overall happiness. Since most of the happiness boost comes from planning and anticipating a vacation, the study suggests that people may get more out of several small trips a year than one big vacation, Mr. Nawijn said. | 3185.txt | 0 |
[
"The longer the vacation is, the happier the travelers will be.",
"The better you get your vacation planned, the more happiness you will get.",
"It will make you happier if you divide a big vacation into small ones.",
"None of the travelers were happier than those who had not been on holiday,"
]
| The study implies that _ . | Vacations are a chance to take a break from work, see the world and enjoy time with family. But do they make you happier?
Researchers from the Netherlands set out to measure the effect that vacations have on overall happiness and how long it lasts. They studied happiness levels among 1,530 Dutch adults, 974 of whom took a vacation during the 32-week study period. The study showed that the largest lift in happiness comes from the simple act of planning a vacation. In the study, the effect of vacation anticipation lifted happiness for eight weeks.
After the vacation, happiness quickly dropped back to baseline levels for most people. How much stress or relaxation a traveler experienced on the trip appeared to influence post-vacation happiness. There was no post-trip happiness benefit for travelers who said the vacation was "neutral" or stressful."
Surprisingly, even those travelers who described the trip as "relaxing" showed no additional jump in happiness after the trip. "They were no happier than people who had not been on holiday," said the lead author, Jeroen Nawijn, tourism research lecturer at Breda University. The only vacationers who experienced an increase in happiness after the trip were those who reported feeling "very relaxed" on their vacation. Among those people, the vacation happiness effect lasted for just two weeks after the trip before returning to baseline levels.
One reason vacations don't increase happiness after the trip may have to do with the stress of returning to work. And for some travelers, the holiday itself was stressful. "In comments from people, the thing they mentioned most referred to disagreements with a travel partner or being ill," Mr. Nawijn said.
The study didn't find any relationship between the length of the vacation and overall happiness. Since most of the happiness boost comes from planning and anticipating a vacation, the study suggests that people may get more out of several small trips a year than one big vacation, Mr. Nawijn said. | 3185.txt | 2 |
[
"People never have additional jump in happiness after the trip.",
"For most people, happiness quickly dropped back to baseline levels after the vacation.",
"The largest lift in happiness comes from the simple act of planning a vacation.",
"Vacations are a chance to get relaxed from work."
]
| Which of the statements is not mentioned in the passage? | Vacations are a chance to take a break from work, see the world and enjoy time with family. But do they make you happier?
Researchers from the Netherlands set out to measure the effect that vacations have on overall happiness and how long it lasts. They studied happiness levels among 1,530 Dutch adults, 974 of whom took a vacation during the 32-week study period. The study showed that the largest lift in happiness comes from the simple act of planning a vacation. In the study, the effect of vacation anticipation lifted happiness for eight weeks.
After the vacation, happiness quickly dropped back to baseline levels for most people. How much stress or relaxation a traveler experienced on the trip appeared to influence post-vacation happiness. There was no post-trip happiness benefit for travelers who said the vacation was "neutral" or stressful."
Surprisingly, even those travelers who described the trip as "relaxing" showed no additional jump in happiness after the trip. "They were no happier than people who had not been on holiday," said the lead author, Jeroen Nawijn, tourism research lecturer at Breda University. The only vacationers who experienced an increase in happiness after the trip were those who reported feeling "very relaxed" on their vacation. Among those people, the vacation happiness effect lasted for just two weeks after the trip before returning to baseline levels.
One reason vacations don't increase happiness after the trip may have to do with the stress of returning to work. And for some travelers, the holiday itself was stressful. "In comments from people, the thing they mentioned most referred to disagreements with a travel partner or being ill," Mr. Nawijn said.
The study didn't find any relationship between the length of the vacation and overall happiness. Since most of the happiness boost comes from planning and anticipating a vacation, the study suggests that people may get more out of several small trips a year than one big vacation, Mr. Nawijn said. | 3185.txt | 0 |
[
"You got different ideas with your partners on holiday.",
"You caught a bad cold during the trip.",
"The worry about whether could return to work or not.",
"The holiday itself could get you stressed."
]
| Which of the following is NOT the reason for not increasing happiness after a trip? | Vacations are a chance to take a break from work, see the world and enjoy time with family. But do they make you happier?
Researchers from the Netherlands set out to measure the effect that vacations have on overall happiness and how long it lasts. They studied happiness levels among 1,530 Dutch adults, 974 of whom took a vacation during the 32-week study period. The study showed that the largest lift in happiness comes from the simple act of planning a vacation. In the study, the effect of vacation anticipation lifted happiness for eight weeks.
After the vacation, happiness quickly dropped back to baseline levels for most people. How much stress or relaxation a traveler experienced on the trip appeared to influence post-vacation happiness. There was no post-trip happiness benefit for travelers who said the vacation was "neutral" or stressful."
Surprisingly, even those travelers who described the trip as "relaxing" showed no additional jump in happiness after the trip. "They were no happier than people who had not been on holiday," said the lead author, Jeroen Nawijn, tourism research lecturer at Breda University. The only vacationers who experienced an increase in happiness after the trip were those who reported feeling "very relaxed" on their vacation. Among those people, the vacation happiness effect lasted for just two weeks after the trip before returning to baseline levels.
One reason vacations don't increase happiness after the trip may have to do with the stress of returning to work. And for some travelers, the holiday itself was stressful. "In comments from people, the thing they mentioned most referred to disagreements with a travel partner or being ill," Mr. Nawijn said.
The study didn't find any relationship between the length of the vacation and overall happiness. Since most of the happiness boost comes from planning and anticipating a vacation, the study suggests that people may get more out of several small trips a year than one big vacation, Mr. Nawijn said. | 3185.txt | 2 |
[
"about one seconds",
"about two thirds",
"more than one third",
"less than three fifth"
]
| During the 32-week study period _ of the people involved took a vacation. | Vacations are a chance to take a break from work, see the world and enjoy time with family. But do they make you happier?
Researchers from the Netherlands set out to measure the effect that vacations have on overall happiness and how long it lasts. They studied happiness levels among 1,530 Dutch adults, 974 of whom took a vacation during the 32-week study period. The study showed that the largest lift in happiness comes from the simple act of planning a vacation. In the study, the effect of vacation anticipation lifted happiness for eight weeks.
After the vacation, happiness quickly dropped back to baseline levels for most people. How much stress or relaxation a traveler experienced on the trip appeared to influence post-vacation happiness. There was no post-trip happiness benefit for travelers who said the vacation was "neutral" or stressful."
Surprisingly, even those travelers who described the trip as "relaxing" showed no additional jump in happiness after the trip. "They were no happier than people who had not been on holiday," said the lead author, Jeroen Nawijn, tourism research lecturer at Breda University. The only vacationers who experienced an increase in happiness after the trip were those who reported feeling "very relaxed" on their vacation. Among those people, the vacation happiness effect lasted for just two weeks after the trip before returning to baseline levels.
One reason vacations don't increase happiness after the trip may have to do with the stress of returning to work. And for some travelers, the holiday itself was stressful. "In comments from people, the thing they mentioned most referred to disagreements with a travel partner or being ill," Mr. Nawijn said.
The study didn't find any relationship between the length of the vacation and overall happiness. Since most of the happiness boost comes from planning and anticipating a vacation, the study suggests that people may get more out of several small trips a year than one big vacation, Mr. Nawijn said. | 3185.txt | 1 |
[
"the biological process in which human beings' sense of self-defense evolves",
"the instinctive fear human beings feel when faced with potential danger",
"the act of evaluating a dangerous situation and making a quick decision",
"the elaborate mechanism in the human brain for retrieving information"
]
| The "so-called fight-or-flight response" (Line 2, Para. 1) refers to "________". | In a purely biological sense, fear begins with the body's system for reacting to things that can harm us-the so-called fight-or-flight response. "An animal that can't detect danger can't stay alive," says Joseph LeDoux. Like animals, humans evolved with an elaborate mechanism for processing information about potential threats. At its core is a cluster of neurons deep in the brain known as the amygdale .
LeDoux studies the way animals and humans respond to threats to understand how we form memories of significant events in our lives. The amygdale receives input from many parts of the brain, including regions responsible for retrieving memories. Using this information, the amygdale appraises a situation-I think this charging dog wants to bite me-and triggers a response by radiating nerve signals throughout the body. These signals produce the familiar signs of distress: trembling, perspiration and fast-moving feet, just to name three.
This fear mechanism is critical to the survival of all animals, but no one can say for sure whether beasts other than humans know they're afraid. That is, as LeDoux says, "if you put that system into a brain that has consciousness, then you get the feeling of fear."
Humans, says Edward M. Hallowell, have the ability to call up images of bad things that happened in the past and to anticipate future events. Combine these higher thought processes with our hardwired danger-detection systems, and you get a near-universal human phenomenon: worry.
That's not necessarily a bad thing, says Hallowell. "When used properly, worry is an incredible device," he says. After all, a little healthy worrying is okay if it leads to constructive action-like having a doctor look at that weird spot on your back.
Hallowell insists, though, that there's a right way to worry. "Never do it alone, get the facts and then make a plan." He says. Most of us have survived a recession, so we're familiar with the belt-tightening strategies needed to survive a slump.
Unfortunately, few of us have much experience dealing with the threat of terrorism, so it's been difficult to get fact about how we should respond. That's why Hallowell believes it was okay for people to indulge some extreme worries last fall by asking doctors for Cipro and buying gas masks. | 799.txt | 1 |
[
"reactions of humans and animals to dangerous situations are often unpredictable",
"memories of significant events enable people to control fear and distress",
"people's unpleasant memories are derived from their feeling of fear",
"the amygdale plays a vital part in human and animal responses to potential danger"
]
| From the studies conducted by LeDoux we learn that ________. | In a purely biological sense, fear begins with the body's system for reacting to things that can harm us-the so-called fight-or-flight response. "An animal that can't detect danger can't stay alive," says Joseph LeDoux. Like animals, humans evolved with an elaborate mechanism for processing information about potential threats. At its core is a cluster of neurons deep in the brain known as the amygdale .
LeDoux studies the way animals and humans respond to threats to understand how we form memories of significant events in our lives. The amygdale receives input from many parts of the brain, including regions responsible for retrieving memories. Using this information, the amygdale appraises a situation-I think this charging dog wants to bite me-and triggers a response by radiating nerve signals throughout the body. These signals produce the familiar signs of distress: trembling, perspiration and fast-moving feet, just to name three.
This fear mechanism is critical to the survival of all animals, but no one can say for sure whether beasts other than humans know they're afraid. That is, as LeDoux says, "if you put that system into a brain that has consciousness, then you get the feeling of fear."
Humans, says Edward M. Hallowell, have the ability to call up images of bad things that happened in the past and to anticipate future events. Combine these higher thought processes with our hardwired danger-detection systems, and you get a near-universal human phenomenon: worry.
That's not necessarily a bad thing, says Hallowell. "When used properly, worry is an incredible device," he says. After all, a little healthy worrying is okay if it leads to constructive action-like having a doctor look at that weird spot on your back.
Hallowell insists, though, that there's a right way to worry. "Never do it alone, get the facts and then make a plan." He says. Most of us have survived a recession, so we're familiar with the belt-tightening strategies needed to survive a slump.
Unfortunately, few of us have much experience dealing with the threat of terrorism, so it's been difficult to get fact about how we should respond. That's why Hallowell believes it was okay for people to indulge some extreme worries last fall by asking doctors for Cipro and buying gas masks. | 799.txt | 3 |
[
"a little worry will do us good if handled properly",
"a little worry will enable us to survive a recession",
"fear strengthens the human desire to survive danger",
"fear helps people to anticipate certain future events"
]
| From the passage we know that ________. | In a purely biological sense, fear begins with the body's system for reacting to things that can harm us-the so-called fight-or-flight response. "An animal that can't detect danger can't stay alive," says Joseph LeDoux. Like animals, humans evolved with an elaborate mechanism for processing information about potential threats. At its core is a cluster of neurons deep in the brain known as the amygdale .
LeDoux studies the way animals and humans respond to threats to understand how we form memories of significant events in our lives. The amygdale receives input from many parts of the brain, including regions responsible for retrieving memories. Using this information, the amygdale appraises a situation-I think this charging dog wants to bite me-and triggers a response by radiating nerve signals throughout the body. These signals produce the familiar signs of distress: trembling, perspiration and fast-moving feet, just to name three.
This fear mechanism is critical to the survival of all animals, but no one can say for sure whether beasts other than humans know they're afraid. That is, as LeDoux says, "if you put that system into a brain that has consciousness, then you get the feeling of fear."
Humans, says Edward M. Hallowell, have the ability to call up images of bad things that happened in the past and to anticipate future events. Combine these higher thought processes with our hardwired danger-detection systems, and you get a near-universal human phenomenon: worry.
That's not necessarily a bad thing, says Hallowell. "When used properly, worry is an incredible device," he says. After all, a little healthy worrying is okay if it leads to constructive action-like having a doctor look at that weird spot on your back.
Hallowell insists, though, that there's a right way to worry. "Never do it alone, get the facts and then make a plan." He says. Most of us have survived a recession, so we're familiar with the belt-tightening strategies needed to survive a slump.
Unfortunately, few of us have much experience dealing with the threat of terrorism, so it's been difficult to get fact about how we should respond. That's why Hallowell believes it was okay for people to indulge some extreme worries last fall by asking doctors for Cipro and buying gas masks. | 799.txt | 0 |
[
"Ask for help from the people around you.",
"Use the belt-tightening strategies for survival.",
"Seek professional advice and take action.",
"Understand the situation and be fully prepared."
]
| Which of the following is the best way to deal with your worries according to Hallowell? | In a purely biological sense, fear begins with the body's system for reacting to things that can harm us-the so-called fight-or-flight response. "An animal that can't detect danger can't stay alive," says Joseph LeDoux. Like animals, humans evolved with an elaborate mechanism for processing information about potential threats. At its core is a cluster of neurons deep in the brain known as the amygdale .
LeDoux studies the way animals and humans respond to threats to understand how we form memories of significant events in our lives. The amygdale receives input from many parts of the brain, including regions responsible for retrieving memories. Using this information, the amygdale appraises a situation-I think this charging dog wants to bite me-and triggers a response by radiating nerve signals throughout the body. These signals produce the familiar signs of distress: trembling, perspiration and fast-moving feet, just to name three.
This fear mechanism is critical to the survival of all animals, but no one can say for sure whether beasts other than humans know they're afraid. That is, as LeDoux says, "if you put that system into a brain that has consciousness, then you get the feeling of fear."
Humans, says Edward M. Hallowell, have the ability to call up images of bad things that happened in the past and to anticipate future events. Combine these higher thought processes with our hardwired danger-detection systems, and you get a near-universal human phenomenon: worry.
That's not necessarily a bad thing, says Hallowell. "When used properly, worry is an incredible device," he says. After all, a little healthy worrying is okay if it leads to constructive action-like having a doctor look at that weird spot on your back.
Hallowell insists, though, that there's a right way to worry. "Never do it alone, get the facts and then make a plan." He says. Most of us have survived a recession, so we're familiar with the belt-tightening strategies needed to survive a slump.
Unfortunately, few of us have much experience dealing with the threat of terrorism, so it's been difficult to get fact about how we should respond. That's why Hallowell believes it was okay for people to indulge some extreme worries last fall by asking doctors for Cipro and buying gas masks. | 799.txt | 3 |
[
"ridiculous",
"understandable",
"over-cautious",
"sensible"
]
| In Hallowell's view, people's reaction to the terrorist threat last fall was ________. | In a purely biological sense, fear begins with the body's system for reacting to things that can harm us-the so-called fight-or-flight response. "An animal that can't detect danger can't stay alive," says Joseph LeDoux. Like animals, humans evolved with an elaborate mechanism for processing information about potential threats. At its core is a cluster of neurons deep in the brain known as the amygdale .
LeDoux studies the way animals and humans respond to threats to understand how we form memories of significant events in our lives. The amygdale receives input from many parts of the brain, including regions responsible for retrieving memories. Using this information, the amygdale appraises a situation-I think this charging dog wants to bite me-and triggers a response by radiating nerve signals throughout the body. These signals produce the familiar signs of distress: trembling, perspiration and fast-moving feet, just to name three.
This fear mechanism is critical to the survival of all animals, but no one can say for sure whether beasts other than humans know they're afraid. That is, as LeDoux says, "if you put that system into a brain that has consciousness, then you get the feeling of fear."
Humans, says Edward M. Hallowell, have the ability to call up images of bad things that happened in the past and to anticipate future events. Combine these higher thought processes with our hardwired danger-detection systems, and you get a near-universal human phenomenon: worry.
That's not necessarily a bad thing, says Hallowell. "When used properly, worry is an incredible device," he says. After all, a little healthy worrying is okay if it leads to constructive action-like having a doctor look at that weird spot on your back.
Hallowell insists, though, that there's a right way to worry. "Never do it alone, get the facts and then make a plan." He says. Most of us have survived a recession, so we're familiar with the belt-tightening strategies needed to survive a slump.
Unfortunately, few of us have much experience dealing with the threat of terrorism, so it's been difficult to get fact about how we should respond. That's why Hallowell believes it was okay for people to indulge some extreme worries last fall by asking doctors for Cipro and buying gas masks. | 799.txt | 1 |
[
"The project receives government support.",
"Different organizations work with each other.",
"His organization makes the best of a bad situation.",
"The project connects flooded roads and highways."
]
| What is special with regard to Rezwan's project? | Old Problem, New Approaches
While clean energy is increasingly used in our daily life, global warning will continue for some decades after CO2 emissionspeak. So even if emissions were to begin to decrease today, we would still face the challenge of adapting to climate change. Here I will stress some smarter and more creative examples of climate adaptation.
When it comes to adaptation, it is important to understand that climate change is a process. We are therefore not talking about adapting to a new standard, but to a constantly shifting set of conditions. This is why, in part at least, the US National Climate Assessment says that: "There is no ‘one-size fits all' adaptation." Nevertheless, there are some actions that offer much and carry little risk or cost.
Around the world, people are adapting in surprising ways, especially in some poor countries. Floods have become more damaging in Bangladesh in recent decades. Mohammed Rezwan saw opportunity where others saw only disaster. His not-for-profit organization runs 100 river boats that serve as floating libraries, schools, and health clinics, and are equipped with solar panels and other communicating facilities. Rezwan is creating floating connectivity to replace flooded roads and highways. But he is also working at a far more fundamental level: his staff show people how to make floating gardens and fish ponds prevent starvation during the wet season.
Elsewhere in Asia even more astonishing actions are being taken. Chewang Norphel lives in a mountainous region in India, where he is known as the Ice Man. The loss of glaciers there due to global warming represents an enormous threat to agriculture. Without the glaciers, water will arrive in the rivers at times when it can damage crops. Norphel's inspiration came from seeing the waste of water over winter, when it was not needed. He directed the wasted water into shallow basins where it froze, and was stored until the spring. His fields of ice supply perfectly timed irrigation water. Having created nine such ice reserves, Norphel calculates that he has stored about 200, 000m3 of water. Climate change is a continuing process, so Norphel's ice reserves will not last forever. Warming will overtake them. But he is providing a few years during which the farmers will, perhaps, be able to find other means of adapting.
Increasing Earth's reflectiveness can cool the planet. In southern Spain the sudden increase of greenhouses (which reflect light back to space) has changed the warming trend locally, and actually cooled the region. While Spain as a whole is heating up quickly, temperatures near the greenhouses have decreased. This example should act as an inspiration for all cities. By painting buildings white, cities may slow down the warming process.
In Peru, local farmers around a mountain with a glacier that has already fallen victim to climate change have begun painting the entire mountain peak white in the hope that the added reflectiveness will restore the life-giving ice. The outcome is still far from clear. But the World Bank has included the project on its of "100 ideas to save the planet".
More ordinary forms of adaptation are happening everywhere. A friend of mine owns an area of land in western Victoria. Over five generations the land has been too wet for cropping. But during the past decade declining rainfall has allowed him to plant highly profitable crops. Farmers in many countries are also adapting like this-either by growing new produce, or by growing the same things differently. This is common sense. But some suggestions for adapting are not. When the polluting industries argue that we've lost the battle to control carbon pollution and have no choice but to adapt, it's a nonsense designed to make the case for business as usual.
Human beings will continue to adapt to the changing climate in both ordinary and astonishing ways. But the most sensible form of adaptation is surely to adapt our energy systems to emit less carbon pollution. After all, if we adapt in that way, we may avoid the need to change in so many others. | 3844.txt | 2 |
[
"Storing ice for future use.",
"Protecting the glaciers from melting.",
"Changing the irrigation time.",
"Postponing the melting of the glaciers."
]
| What did the Ice Man do to reduce the effect of global warming? | Old Problem, New Approaches
While clean energy is increasingly used in our daily life, global warning will continue for some decades after CO2 emissionspeak. So even if emissions were to begin to decrease today, we would still face the challenge of adapting to climate change. Here I will stress some smarter and more creative examples of climate adaptation.
When it comes to adaptation, it is important to understand that climate change is a process. We are therefore not talking about adapting to a new standard, but to a constantly shifting set of conditions. This is why, in part at least, the US National Climate Assessment says that: "There is no ‘one-size fits all' adaptation." Nevertheless, there are some actions that offer much and carry little risk or cost.
Around the world, people are adapting in surprising ways, especially in some poor countries. Floods have become more damaging in Bangladesh in recent decades. Mohammed Rezwan saw opportunity where others saw only disaster. His not-for-profit organization runs 100 river boats that serve as floating libraries, schools, and health clinics, and are equipped with solar panels and other communicating facilities. Rezwan is creating floating connectivity to replace flooded roads and highways. But he is also working at a far more fundamental level: his staff show people how to make floating gardens and fish ponds prevent starvation during the wet season.
Elsewhere in Asia even more astonishing actions are being taken. Chewang Norphel lives in a mountainous region in India, where he is known as the Ice Man. The loss of glaciers there due to global warming represents an enormous threat to agriculture. Without the glaciers, water will arrive in the rivers at times when it can damage crops. Norphel's inspiration came from seeing the waste of water over winter, when it was not needed. He directed the wasted water into shallow basins where it froze, and was stored until the spring. His fields of ice supply perfectly timed irrigation water. Having created nine such ice reserves, Norphel calculates that he has stored about 200, 000m3 of water. Climate change is a continuing process, so Norphel's ice reserves will not last forever. Warming will overtake them. But he is providing a few years during which the farmers will, perhaps, be able to find other means of adapting.
Increasing Earth's reflectiveness can cool the planet. In southern Spain the sudden increase of greenhouses (which reflect light back to space) has changed the warming trend locally, and actually cooled the region. While Spain as a whole is heating up quickly, temperatures near the greenhouses have decreased. This example should act as an inspiration for all cities. By painting buildings white, cities may slow down the warming process.
In Peru, local farmers around a mountain with a glacier that has already fallen victim to climate change have begun painting the entire mountain peak white in the hope that the added reflectiveness will restore the life-giving ice. The outcome is still far from clear. But the World Bank has included the project on its of "100 ideas to save the planet".
More ordinary forms of adaptation are happening everywhere. A friend of mine owns an area of land in western Victoria. Over five generations the land has been too wet for cropping. But during the past decade declining rainfall has allowed him to plant highly profitable crops. Farmers in many countries are also adapting like this-either by growing new produce, or by growing the same things differently. This is common sense. But some suggestions for adapting are not. When the polluting industries argue that we've lost the battle to control carbon pollution and have no choice but to adapt, it's a nonsense designed to make the case for business as usual.
Human beings will continue to adapt to the changing climate in both ordinary and astonishing ways. But the most sensible form of adaptation is surely to adapt our energy systems to emit less carbon pollution. After all, if we adapt in that way, we may avoid the need to change in so many others. | 3844.txt | 0 |
[
"White paint is usually safe for buildings.",
"The global warming tread cannot be stopped.",
"This country is heating up too quickly.",
"Sunlight reflection may relieve global warming."
]
| What do we learn from the Peru example? | Old Problem, New Approaches
While clean energy is increasingly used in our daily life, global warning will continue for some decades after CO2 emissionspeak. So even if emissions were to begin to decrease today, we would still face the challenge of adapting to climate change. Here I will stress some smarter and more creative examples of climate adaptation.
When it comes to adaptation, it is important to understand that climate change is a process. We are therefore not talking about adapting to a new standard, but to a constantly shifting set of conditions. This is why, in part at least, the US National Climate Assessment says that: "There is no ‘one-size fits all' adaptation." Nevertheless, there are some actions that offer much and carry little risk or cost.
Around the world, people are adapting in surprising ways, especially in some poor countries. Floods have become more damaging in Bangladesh in recent decades. Mohammed Rezwan saw opportunity where others saw only disaster. His not-for-profit organization runs 100 river boats that serve as floating libraries, schools, and health clinics, and are equipped with solar panels and other communicating facilities. Rezwan is creating floating connectivity to replace flooded roads and highways. But he is also working at a far more fundamental level: his staff show people how to make floating gardens and fish ponds prevent starvation during the wet season.
Elsewhere in Asia even more astonishing actions are being taken. Chewang Norphel lives in a mountainous region in India, where he is known as the Ice Man. The loss of glaciers there due to global warming represents an enormous threat to agriculture. Without the glaciers, water will arrive in the rivers at times when it can damage crops. Norphel's inspiration came from seeing the waste of water over winter, when it was not needed. He directed the wasted water into shallow basins where it froze, and was stored until the spring. His fields of ice supply perfectly timed irrigation water. Having created nine such ice reserves, Norphel calculates that he has stored about 200, 000m3 of water. Climate change is a continuing process, so Norphel's ice reserves will not last forever. Warming will overtake them. But he is providing a few years during which the farmers will, perhaps, be able to find other means of adapting.
Increasing Earth's reflectiveness can cool the planet. In southern Spain the sudden increase of greenhouses (which reflect light back to space) has changed the warming trend locally, and actually cooled the region. While Spain as a whole is heating up quickly, temperatures near the greenhouses have decreased. This example should act as an inspiration for all cities. By painting buildings white, cities may slow down the warming process.
In Peru, local farmers around a mountain with a glacier that has already fallen victim to climate change have begun painting the entire mountain peak white in the hope that the added reflectiveness will restore the life-giving ice. The outcome is still far from clear. But the World Bank has included the project on its of "100 ideas to save the planet".
More ordinary forms of adaptation are happening everywhere. A friend of mine owns an area of land in western Victoria. Over five generations the land has been too wet for cropping. But during the past decade declining rainfall has allowed him to plant highly profitable crops. Farmers in many countries are also adapting like this-either by growing new produce, or by growing the same things differently. This is common sense. But some suggestions for adapting are not. When the polluting industries argue that we've lost the battle to control carbon pollution and have no choice but to adapt, it's a nonsense designed to make the case for business as usual.
Human beings will continue to adapt to the changing climate in both ordinary and astonishing ways. But the most sensible form of adaptation is surely to adapt our energy systems to emit less carbon pollution. After all, if we adapt in that way, we may avoid the need to change in so many others. | 3844.txt | 3 |
[
"adapt to carbon pollution",
"plant highly profitable crops",
"leave carbon emission alone",
"fight against carbon pollution"
]
| According to the author, polluting industries should. | Old Problem, New Approaches
While clean energy is increasingly used in our daily life, global warning will continue for some decades after CO2 emissionspeak. So even if emissions were to begin to decrease today, we would still face the challenge of adapting to climate change. Here I will stress some smarter and more creative examples of climate adaptation.
When it comes to adaptation, it is important to understand that climate change is a process. We are therefore not talking about adapting to a new standard, but to a constantly shifting set of conditions. This is why, in part at least, the US National Climate Assessment says that: "There is no ‘one-size fits all' adaptation." Nevertheless, there are some actions that offer much and carry little risk or cost.
Around the world, people are adapting in surprising ways, especially in some poor countries. Floods have become more damaging in Bangladesh in recent decades. Mohammed Rezwan saw opportunity where others saw only disaster. His not-for-profit organization runs 100 river boats that serve as floating libraries, schools, and health clinics, and are equipped with solar panels and other communicating facilities. Rezwan is creating floating connectivity to replace flooded roads and highways. But he is also working at a far more fundamental level: his staff show people how to make floating gardens and fish ponds prevent starvation during the wet season.
Elsewhere in Asia even more astonishing actions are being taken. Chewang Norphel lives in a mountainous region in India, where he is known as the Ice Man. The loss of glaciers there due to global warming represents an enormous threat to agriculture. Without the glaciers, water will arrive in the rivers at times when it can damage crops. Norphel's inspiration came from seeing the waste of water over winter, when it was not needed. He directed the wasted water into shallow basins where it froze, and was stored until the spring. His fields of ice supply perfectly timed irrigation water. Having created nine such ice reserves, Norphel calculates that he has stored about 200, 000m3 of water. Climate change is a continuing process, so Norphel's ice reserves will not last forever. Warming will overtake them. But he is providing a few years during which the farmers will, perhaps, be able to find other means of adapting.
Increasing Earth's reflectiveness can cool the planet. In southern Spain the sudden increase of greenhouses (which reflect light back to space) has changed the warming trend locally, and actually cooled the region. While Spain as a whole is heating up quickly, temperatures near the greenhouses have decreased. This example should act as an inspiration for all cities. By painting buildings white, cities may slow down the warming process.
In Peru, local farmers around a mountain with a glacier that has already fallen victim to climate change have begun painting the entire mountain peak white in the hope that the added reflectiveness will restore the life-giving ice. The outcome is still far from clear. But the World Bank has included the project on its of "100 ideas to save the planet".
More ordinary forms of adaptation are happening everywhere. A friend of mine owns an area of land in western Victoria. Over five generations the land has been too wet for cropping. But during the past decade declining rainfall has allowed him to plant highly profitable crops. Farmers in many countries are also adapting like this-either by growing new produce, or by growing the same things differently. This is common sense. But some suggestions for adapting are not. When the polluting industries argue that we've lost the battle to control carbon pollution and have no choice but to adapt, it's a nonsense designed to make the case for business as usual.
Human beings will continue to adapt to the changing climate in both ordinary and astonishing ways. But the most sensible form of adaptation is surely to adapt our energy systems to emit less carbon pollution. After all, if we adapt in that way, we may avoid the need to change in so many others. | 3844.txt | 3 |
[
"Setting up a new standard.",
"Reducing carbon emission.",
"Adapting to climate change.",
"Monitoring polluting industries."
]
| What's the author's preferred solution to global warming? | Old Problem, New Approaches
While clean energy is increasingly used in our daily life, global warning will continue for some decades after CO2 emissionspeak. So even if emissions were to begin to decrease today, we would still face the challenge of adapting to climate change. Here I will stress some smarter and more creative examples of climate adaptation.
When it comes to adaptation, it is important to understand that climate change is a process. We are therefore not talking about adapting to a new standard, but to a constantly shifting set of conditions. This is why, in part at least, the US National Climate Assessment says that: "There is no ‘one-size fits all' adaptation." Nevertheless, there are some actions that offer much and carry little risk or cost.
Around the world, people are adapting in surprising ways, especially in some poor countries. Floods have become more damaging in Bangladesh in recent decades. Mohammed Rezwan saw opportunity where others saw only disaster. His not-for-profit organization runs 100 river boats that serve as floating libraries, schools, and health clinics, and are equipped with solar panels and other communicating facilities. Rezwan is creating floating connectivity to replace flooded roads and highways. But he is also working at a far more fundamental level: his staff show people how to make floating gardens and fish ponds prevent starvation during the wet season.
Elsewhere in Asia even more astonishing actions are being taken. Chewang Norphel lives in a mountainous region in India, where he is known as the Ice Man. The loss of glaciers there due to global warming represents an enormous threat to agriculture. Without the glaciers, water will arrive in the rivers at times when it can damage crops. Norphel's inspiration came from seeing the waste of water over winter, when it was not needed. He directed the wasted water into shallow basins where it froze, and was stored until the spring. His fields of ice supply perfectly timed irrigation water. Having created nine such ice reserves, Norphel calculates that he has stored about 200, 000m3 of water. Climate change is a continuing process, so Norphel's ice reserves will not last forever. Warming will overtake them. But he is providing a few years during which the farmers will, perhaps, be able to find other means of adapting.
Increasing Earth's reflectiveness can cool the planet. In southern Spain the sudden increase of greenhouses (which reflect light back to space) has changed the warming trend locally, and actually cooled the region. While Spain as a whole is heating up quickly, temperatures near the greenhouses have decreased. This example should act as an inspiration for all cities. By painting buildings white, cities may slow down the warming process.
In Peru, local farmers around a mountain with a glacier that has already fallen victim to climate change have begun painting the entire mountain peak white in the hope that the added reflectiveness will restore the life-giving ice. The outcome is still far from clear. But the World Bank has included the project on its of "100 ideas to save the planet".
More ordinary forms of adaptation are happening everywhere. A friend of mine owns an area of land in western Victoria. Over five generations the land has been too wet for cropping. But during the past decade declining rainfall has allowed him to plant highly profitable crops. Farmers in many countries are also adapting like this-either by growing new produce, or by growing the same things differently. This is common sense. But some suggestions for adapting are not. When the polluting industries argue that we've lost the battle to control carbon pollution and have no choice but to adapt, it's a nonsense designed to make the case for business as usual.
Human beings will continue to adapt to the changing climate in both ordinary and astonishing ways. But the most sensible form of adaptation is surely to adapt our energy systems to emit less carbon pollution. After all, if we adapt in that way, we may avoid the need to change in so many others. | 3844.txt | 1 |
[
"their limited value to business",
"their connection with asset allocation",
"the possible restriction on their granting",
"the controversy over authorization"
]
| Business-method patents have recently aroused concern because of | Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click" online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz the U.S. court of Appeals for the federal circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known , is "a very big deal", says Dennis D. Crouch of the University of Missouri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with is 1998 decision in the so-called state Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, move established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its state street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court", says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School. | 2304.txt | 2 |
[
"Its ruling complies with the court decisions",
"It involves a very big business transaction",
"It has been dismissed by the Federal Circuit",
"It may change the legal practices in the U.S."
]
| Which of the following is true of the Bilski case? | Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click" online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz the U.S. court of Appeals for the federal circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known , is "a very big deal", says Dennis D. Crouch of the University of Missouri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with is 1998 decision in the so-called state Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, move established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its state street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court", says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School. | 2304.txt | 1 |
[
"loss of good will",
"increase of hostility",
"change of attitude",
"enhancement of dignity"
]
| The word "about-face" (Line 1, Para 3) most probably means | Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click" online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz the U.S. court of Appeals for the federal circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known , is "a very big deal", says Dennis D. Crouch of the University of Missouri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with is 1998 decision in the so-called state Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, move established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its state street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court", says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School. | 2304.txt | 2 |
[
"are immune to legal challenges",
"are often unnecessarily issued",
"lower the esteem for patent holders",
"increase the incidence of risks"
]
| We learn from the last two paragraphs that business-method patents | Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click" online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz the U.S. court of Appeals for the federal circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known , is "a very big deal", says Dennis D. Crouch of the University of Missouri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with is 1998 decision in the so-called state Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, move established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its state street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court", says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School. | 2304.txt | 1 |
[
"A looming threat to business-method patents",
"Protection for business-method patent holders",
"A legal case regarding business-method patents",
"A prevailing trend against business-method patents"
]
| Which of the following would be the subject of the text? | Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click" online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz the U.S. court of Appeals for the federal circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known , is "a very big deal", says Dennis D. Crouch of the University of Missouri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with is 1998 decision in the so-called state Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, move established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its state street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court", says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School. | 2304.txt | 0 |
[
"They are resistant to certain herbicides.",
"They grow best in the United States.",
"They were treated with the chemicals glyphosate.",
"They are resistant to destruction by insects."
]
| According to paragraph 1, which of the following is true of transgenic plants that produce the protein Bt? | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 3 |
[
"increase crop production by up to 21 percent",
"use fewer and less toxic chemicals",
"control weeds without the use of glyphosate",
"take advantage of more effective herbicides"
]
| According to paragraph 2, supporters claim that producing transgenic plants enables farmers to | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 1 |
[
"harmful",
"long lasting",
"expensive",
"hard to control"
]
| The word "persistent" in the passage in closest in meaning to | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 1 |
[
"They often cause damage to corn crops.",
"They are the only species that is immune to Bt toxin.",
"They are considered beneficial insects.",
"Their reactions to Bt pollen have not yet been studied."
]
| Which of the following can be inferred about monarch caterpillars from paragraph 3? | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 2 |
[
"Bt toxins do not affect nontarget organisms because the toxins only harm pests that eat the leaves, stems, or fruit of the plants.",
"Bt plants have been shown in field studies to cause great harm to nontarget organisms.",
"Bt plants do not cause as much harm to nontarget species as the use of conventional pesticides.",
"Even if Bt toxins do not affect the insects that feed on the plants, they have harmful effects on birds that eat these insects."
]
| What conclusion does the author make in paragraph 3 about the effect of Bt plants on notarget organisms? | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 2 |
[
"continued",
"reproduced",
"observed",
"spread"
]
| The word "perpetuated" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 0 |
[
"effect",
"problem",
"resistance",
"situation"
]
| The word "scenario" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 3 |
[
"To give an example of a weed that may become resistant to glyphosate due to hybridizing with a transgenic plant.",
"To argue that creating transgenic plants in the laboratory is not always necessary, as some can be created through hybridizing in the fields.",
"To provide evidence that competition from related species of plants can be a serious problem for transgenic plants.",
"To support the claim that it is difficult to determine whether or not a crop plant has been planted a safe distance from weedy relatives."
]
| Why does the author mention "mustard weed species" in the discussion of plants that hybridize? | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 0 |
[
"Regular use of Bt pesticides has not created resistant insect populations, so the use of Bt plants is probably safe as well.",
"The evolution of Bt-resistant insect populations will happen eventually if use of transgenic plants becomes widespread.",
"Because Bt plants are toxic at all times and in all tissues, they allow only Bt- resistant insects to survive and reproduce.",
"Planting nontransgenic plants alongside Bt plants may help Bt-susceptible insects to remain part of the population."
]
| Paragraph 5 makes all of the following claims about Bt resistance in insect populations EXCEPT: | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 0 |
[
"watching the fields closely to determine when weeds or pests are actually a problem",
"applying pesticides unless or until pesticides are needed",
"using only one type of herbicide throughout the growing season",
"planting nontransgenic crops"
]
| According to paragraph 6, a sustainable approach to weed and pest control includes all of the following EXCEPT | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 2 |
[
"in the opinion of experts",
"at the present moment",
"when done properly",
"without deeper analysis"
]
| The word "superficially" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Genes from virtually any organism, from viruses to humans, can now be inserted into plants, creating what are known as transgenic plants. Now used in agriculture, there are approximately 109 million acres of transgenic crops grown worldwide, 68 percent of which are in the United States. The most common transgenic crops are soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Most often, these plants either contain a gene making them resistant to the herbicide glyphosate or they contain an insect-resistant gene that produces a protein called Bt toxin.
On the positive side, proponents of transgenic crops argue that these crops are environmentally friendly because they allow farmers to use fewer and less noxious chemicals for crop production. For example, a 21 percent reduction in the use of insecticide has been reported on Bt cotton (transgenic cotton that produces Bt toxin). In addition, when glyphosate is used to control weeds, other more persistent herbicides do not need to be applied.
On the negative side, opponents of transgenic crops suggest that there are many questions that need to be answered before transgenic crops are grown on a large scale. One question deals with the effects that Bt plants have on nontarget organisms such as beneficial insects, worms, and birds that consume the genetically engineered crop. For example, monarch caterpillars feeding on milkweed plants near Bt cornfields will eat some corn pollen that has fallen on the milkweed leaves. Laboratory studies indicate that caterpillars can die from eating Bt pollen. However, field tests indicate that Bt corn is not likely to harm monarchs. Furthermore, the application of pesticides (the alternative to growing Bt plants) has been demonstrated to cause widespread harm to nontarget insects.
Another unanswered question is whether herbicide-resistant genes will move into the populations of weeds. Crop plants are sometimes grown in areas where weedy relatives also live. If the crop plants hybridize and reproduce with weedy relatives, then this herbicide-resistant gene will be perpetuated in the offspring. In this way, the resistant gene can make its way into the weed population. If this happens, a farmer can no longer use glyphosate, for example, to kill those weeds. This scenario is not likely to occur in many instances because there are no weedy relatives growing near the crop plant. However, in some cases, it may become a serious problem. For example, canola readily hybridizes with mustard weed species and could transfer its herbicide-resistant genes to those weeds.
We know that evolution will occur when transgenic plants grown on a large scale over a period of time. Of special concern is the development of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxin. This pesticide has been applied to plants for decades without the development of insect-resistant populations. However, transgenic Bt plants express the toxin in all tissues throughout growing season. Therefore, all insects carrying genes that make them susceptible to the toxin will die. That leaves only the genetically resistant insects alive to perpetuate the population. When these resistant insects mate, they will produce a high proportion of offspring capable of surviving in the presence of the Bt toxin. Farmers are attempting to slow the development of insect resistance in Bt crops by, for example, planting nontransgenic border rows to provide a refuge for susceptible insects. These insects may allow Bt susceptibility to remain in the population.
Perhaps the most serious concern about the transgenic crop plants currently in use is that they encourage farmers to move farther away from sustainable agricultural farming practices, meaning ones that allow natural resources to continually regenerate over the long run. Transgenics, at least superficially, simplify farming by reducing the choices made by the manager. Planting a glyphosate-resistant crop commits a farmer to using that herbicide for the reason, probably to the exclusion of all other herbicides and other weed-control practices. Farmers who use Bt transgenics may not feel that they need to follow through with integrated pest-management practices that use beneficial insects and timely applications of pesticides to control insect pests. A more sustainable approach would be to plant nontransgenic corn, monitor the fields throughout the growing season, and then apply a pesticide only if and when needed. | 3301.txt | 3 |
[
"the Browns have never had a pet before.",
"the Browns knew about Shadow from the newspaper.",
"Shadow is a small and healthy dog.",
"Mr Brown didn't quite agree with his wife."
]
| From the reading we learn that _ . | " Well, we're in our new house. Let's get a new pet to get along with it," Mrs Brown said to her husband.
" That sounds like a pretty good idea," he answered.
"Do you want to see the ads in the newspaper?"
" Let's go to the animal shelter. Many pets there need homes. Since tomorrow is Saturday, we can both go," she said.
Next morning the Browns met Mr Snow at the animal shelter. "We want to be sure that the pets here go to good homes," Mr Snow said, "So I need to ask you some questions."
After they talked for a while, the Browns decided to get a small dog. It wouldn't need a big house or a big yard. A small dog would bark and warm them if someone tried to break into their house. After Mr Snow gave the Browns a book on pet care, they chose one and wanted to take her home right away. But the animal doctor hadn't checked her yet. So Mr Snow told them to return on Sunday.
On Sunday afternoon the Browns went to the animal shelter. The animal doctor said, " Shadow has had all of her shots. She will be healthy. " The browns thanked the doctor and took Shadow home. | 3433.txt | 2 |
[
"a place to sell small dogs",
"a place to keep homeless animals",
"a place to study animals",
"a place to sell books on pet care"
]
| The word shelter in the reading means _ . | " Well, we're in our new house. Let's get a new pet to get along with it," Mrs Brown said to her husband.
" That sounds like a pretty good idea," he answered.
"Do you want to see the ads in the newspaper?"
" Let's go to the animal shelter. Many pets there need homes. Since tomorrow is Saturday, we can both go," she said.
Next morning the Browns met Mr Snow at the animal shelter. "We want to be sure that the pets here go to good homes," Mr Snow said, "So I need to ask you some questions."
After they talked for a while, the Browns decided to get a small dog. It wouldn't need a big house or a big yard. A small dog would bark and warm them if someone tried to break into their house. After Mr Snow gave the Browns a book on pet care, they chose one and wanted to take her home right away. But the animal doctor hadn't checked her yet. So Mr Snow told them to return on Sunday.
On Sunday afternoon the Browns went to the animal shelter. The animal doctor said, " Shadow has had all of her shots. She will be healthy. " The browns thanked the doctor and took Shadow home. | 3433.txt | 1 |
[
"see if they had moved to a new house",
"find out how rich the Browns were",
"know where they'd keep their new pet",
"make sure they'd take care of pets"
]
| Mr Snow asked the Browns some questions to _ . | " Well, we're in our new house. Let's get a new pet to get along with it," Mrs Brown said to her husband.
" That sounds like a pretty good idea," he answered.
"Do you want to see the ads in the newspaper?"
" Let's go to the animal shelter. Many pets there need homes. Since tomorrow is Saturday, we can both go," she said.
Next morning the Browns met Mr Snow at the animal shelter. "We want to be sure that the pets here go to good homes," Mr Snow said, "So I need to ask you some questions."
After they talked for a while, the Browns decided to get a small dog. It wouldn't need a big house or a big yard. A small dog would bark and warm them if someone tried to break into their house. After Mr Snow gave the Browns a book on pet care, they chose one and wanted to take her home right away. But the animal doctor hadn't checked her yet. So Mr Snow told them to return on Sunday.
On Sunday afternoon the Browns went to the animal shelter. The animal doctor said, " Shadow has had all of her shots. She will be healthy. " The browns thanked the doctor and took Shadow home. | 3433.txt | 3 |
[
"doesn't need any room to keep",
"can help them watch their house",
"eats less food than a bigger one",
"usually has a beautiful name"
]
| The Browns thinks that a small dog _ . | " Well, we're in our new house. Let's get a new pet to get along with it," Mrs Brown said to her husband.
" That sounds like a pretty good idea," he answered.
"Do you want to see the ads in the newspaper?"
" Let's go to the animal shelter. Many pets there need homes. Since tomorrow is Saturday, we can both go," she said.
Next morning the Browns met Mr Snow at the animal shelter. "We want to be sure that the pets here go to good homes," Mr Snow said, "So I need to ask you some questions."
After they talked for a while, the Browns decided to get a small dog. It wouldn't need a big house or a big yard. A small dog would bark and warm them if someone tried to break into their house. After Mr Snow gave the Browns a book on pet care, they chose one and wanted to take her home right away. But the animal doctor hadn't checked her yet. So Mr Snow told them to return on Sunday.
On Sunday afternoon the Browns went to the animal shelter. The animal doctor said, " Shadow has had all of her shots. She will be healthy. " The browns thanked the doctor and took Shadow home. | 3433.txt | 1 |
[
"Shadow will not be easy to get ill",
"the Browns were not satisfied with Shadow",
"Mr Snow didn't check Shadow at all",
"Shadow likes barking a lot"
]
| It's clear that _ . | " Well, we're in our new house. Let's get a new pet to get along with it," Mrs Brown said to her husband.
" That sounds like a pretty good idea," he answered.
"Do you want to see the ads in the newspaper?"
" Let's go to the animal shelter. Many pets there need homes. Since tomorrow is Saturday, we can both go," she said.
Next morning the Browns met Mr Snow at the animal shelter. "We want to be sure that the pets here go to good homes," Mr Snow said, "So I need to ask you some questions."
After they talked for a while, the Browns decided to get a small dog. It wouldn't need a big house or a big yard. A small dog would bark and warm them if someone tried to break into their house. After Mr Snow gave the Browns a book on pet care, they chose one and wanted to take her home right away. But the animal doctor hadn't checked her yet. So Mr Snow told them to return on Sunday.
On Sunday afternoon the Browns went to the animal shelter. The animal doctor said, " Shadow has had all of her shots. She will be healthy. " The browns thanked the doctor and took Shadow home. | 3433.txt | 0 |
[
"cry out in water",
"ring a bell",
"beat the water with our hands",
"keep silent"
]
| According to the writer, if we see a shark approaching, we should_ . | There can be no doubt that sharks hear perfectly. Experience has shown that they react to the sound of blows under water, to the sound of a bell, or to the noises made by a diver at work. In general, their reaction is one of intense interest. I have often tried bits of advice like "If you see a shark approaching, beat the water with your hands," or the famous warning given to beginning divers, "If you want to drive a shark away, cry out in the water. " In my experience, such advice is almost criminal. In most cases the consequence was an immediate attack.
There seems to be no reason for the shark's frenzy. This, I think, is what hits me most, giving me a feeling of complete helplessness. The mad rush of hordes of sharks toward the exact point where one of their own has devoured a bit of fish is terrifying to watch. The beasts seem unstoppable and fatal-and totally senseless.
Sometimes the shark will flee from a naked and unarmed diver, and at other times he will throw himself against a steel diving cage and hit furiously at the bars. With any other animal-be it dog or crow-I know that my actions or
reactions will have a direct influence on its behavior. But the shark moves through my world like a puppet whose strings are controlled by something other than the power moving mine; he seems to come from another planet. In fact, he does come from another time in that he has evolved little since his beginning. He perfectly adapts to his life, yet no one can ever predict what he will do.
We do not know if sharks migrate from one region to another, but it has been established that the majority swim unceasingly, day and night. There are two reasons for this. Sharks do not have a "swimming bladder" (an organ that allows most fish to stabilize themselves at different depths). If sharks stop swimming they will sink. Also, most species have no mechanism for pumping water so that it will pass over their gills and bring oxygen into the bloodstream. They must depend on constant movement for this "breathing. " | 1469.txt | 3 |
[
"Criminal.",
"Senseless.",
"Helpless.",
"Terrified."
]
| Which of the following adjectives can best describe the shark's rush towards the spot where some blood is? | There can be no doubt that sharks hear perfectly. Experience has shown that they react to the sound of blows under water, to the sound of a bell, or to the noises made by a diver at work. In general, their reaction is one of intense interest. I have often tried bits of advice like "If you see a shark approaching, beat the water with your hands," or the famous warning given to beginning divers, "If you want to drive a shark away, cry out in the water. " In my experience, such advice is almost criminal. In most cases the consequence was an immediate attack.
There seems to be no reason for the shark's frenzy. This, I think, is what hits me most, giving me a feeling of complete helplessness. The mad rush of hordes of sharks toward the exact point where one of their own has devoured a bit of fish is terrifying to watch. The beasts seem unstoppable and fatal-and totally senseless.
Sometimes the shark will flee from a naked and unarmed diver, and at other times he will throw himself against a steel diving cage and hit furiously at the bars. With any other animal-be it dog or crow-I know that my actions or
reactions will have a direct influence on its behavior. But the shark moves through my world like a puppet whose strings are controlled by something other than the power moving mine; he seems to come from another planet. In fact, he does come from another time in that he has evolved little since his beginning. He perfectly adapts to his life, yet no one can ever predict what he will do.
We do not know if sharks migrate from one region to another, but it has been established that the majority swim unceasingly, day and night. There are two reasons for this. Sharks do not have a "swimming bladder" (an organ that allows most fish to stabilize themselves at different depths). If sharks stop swimming they will sink. Also, most species have no mechanism for pumping water so that it will pass over their gills and bring oxygen into the bloodstream. They must depend on constant movement for this "breathing. " | 1469.txt | 1 |
[
"the influence of its behavior",
"the adaptation of its behavior",
"the unpredictability of its behavior",
"its difference from dog or crow"
]
| In Paragraph 3, the writer describes the behavior of sharks in order to show_ . | There can be no doubt that sharks hear perfectly. Experience has shown that they react to the sound of blows under water, to the sound of a bell, or to the noises made by a diver at work. In general, their reaction is one of intense interest. I have often tried bits of advice like "If you see a shark approaching, beat the water with your hands," or the famous warning given to beginning divers, "If you want to drive a shark away, cry out in the water. " In my experience, such advice is almost criminal. In most cases the consequence was an immediate attack.
There seems to be no reason for the shark's frenzy. This, I think, is what hits me most, giving me a feeling of complete helplessness. The mad rush of hordes of sharks toward the exact point where one of their own has devoured a bit of fish is terrifying to watch. The beasts seem unstoppable and fatal-and totally senseless.
Sometimes the shark will flee from a naked and unarmed diver, and at other times he will throw himself against a steel diving cage and hit furiously at the bars. With any other animal-be it dog or crow-I know that my actions or
reactions will have a direct influence on its behavior. But the shark moves through my world like a puppet whose strings are controlled by something other than the power moving mine; he seems to come from another planet. In fact, he does come from another time in that he has evolved little since his beginning. He perfectly adapts to his life, yet no one can ever predict what he will do.
We do not know if sharks migrate from one region to another, but it has been established that the majority swim unceasingly, day and night. There are two reasons for this. Sharks do not have a "swimming bladder" (an organ that allows most fish to stabilize themselves at different depths). If sharks stop swimming they will sink. Also, most species have no mechanism for pumping water so that it will pass over their gills and bring oxygen into the bloodstream. They must depend on constant movement for this "breathing. " | 1469.txt | 2 |
[
"They are various kinds of puppets.",
"Most of them swim from one place to another every year.",
"Most of them keep on swimming without stopping.",
"Most of them have a swimming bladder."
]
| Which of the following statements about sharks is TRUE? | There can be no doubt that sharks hear perfectly. Experience has shown that they react to the sound of blows under water, to the sound of a bell, or to the noises made by a diver at work. In general, their reaction is one of intense interest. I have often tried bits of advice like "If you see a shark approaching, beat the water with your hands," or the famous warning given to beginning divers, "If you want to drive a shark away, cry out in the water. " In my experience, such advice is almost criminal. In most cases the consequence was an immediate attack.
There seems to be no reason for the shark's frenzy. This, I think, is what hits me most, giving me a feeling of complete helplessness. The mad rush of hordes of sharks toward the exact point where one of their own has devoured a bit of fish is terrifying to watch. The beasts seem unstoppable and fatal-and totally senseless.
Sometimes the shark will flee from a naked and unarmed diver, and at other times he will throw himself against a steel diving cage and hit furiously at the bars. With any other animal-be it dog or crow-I know that my actions or
reactions will have a direct influence on its behavior. But the shark moves through my world like a puppet whose strings are controlled by something other than the power moving mine; he seems to come from another planet. In fact, he does come from another time in that he has evolved little since his beginning. He perfectly adapts to his life, yet no one can ever predict what he will do.
We do not know if sharks migrate from one region to another, but it has been established that the majority swim unceasingly, day and night. There are two reasons for this. Sharks do not have a "swimming bladder" (an organ that allows most fish to stabilize themselves at different depths). If sharks stop swimming they will sink. Also, most species have no mechanism for pumping water so that it will pass over their gills and bring oxygen into the bloodstream. They must depend on constant movement for this "breathing. " | 1469.txt | 2 |
[
"helplessness",
"madness",
"terror",
"rush"
]
| The word "frenzy" most probably means_ . | There can be no doubt that sharks hear perfectly. Experience has shown that they react to the sound of blows under water, to the sound of a bell, or to the noises made by a diver at work. In general, their reaction is one of intense interest. I have often tried bits of advice like "If you see a shark approaching, beat the water with your hands," or the famous warning given to beginning divers, "If you want to drive a shark away, cry out in the water. " In my experience, such advice is almost criminal. In most cases the consequence was an immediate attack.
There seems to be no reason for the shark's frenzy. This, I think, is what hits me most, giving me a feeling of complete helplessness. The mad rush of hordes of sharks toward the exact point where one of their own has devoured a bit of fish is terrifying to watch. The beasts seem unstoppable and fatal-and totally senseless.
Sometimes the shark will flee from a naked and unarmed diver, and at other times he will throw himself against a steel diving cage and hit furiously at the bars. With any other animal-be it dog or crow-I know that my actions or
reactions will have a direct influence on its behavior. But the shark moves through my world like a puppet whose strings are controlled by something other than the power moving mine; he seems to come from another planet. In fact, he does come from another time in that he has evolved little since his beginning. He perfectly adapts to his life, yet no one can ever predict what he will do.
We do not know if sharks migrate from one region to another, but it has been established that the majority swim unceasingly, day and night. There are two reasons for this. Sharks do not have a "swimming bladder" (an organ that allows most fish to stabilize themselves at different depths). If sharks stop swimming they will sink. Also, most species have no mechanism for pumping water so that it will pass over their gills and bring oxygen into the bloodstream. They must depend on constant movement for this "breathing. " | 1469.txt | 1 |
[
"their size.",
"their appearance.",
"the kind of food they eat.",
"the way they rest."
]
| The passage tells us that there is no difference between the flying fox and the ordinary bat in _ . | The flying fox is not a fox at all. It is an extra large bat that has got a fox's head, and that feeds on fruit instead of insects . Like all bats, flying foxes hang themselves by their toes when at rest, and travel in great crowds when out flying. A group will live in one spot for years. Sometimes several hundred of them occupy a single tree. As they return to the tree toward sunrise, they quarrel among themselves and fight for the best places until long after daylight.
Flying foxes have babies once a year, giving birth to only one at a time. At first the mother has to carry the baby on her breast wherever she goes. Later she leaves it hanging up, and brings back food for it to eat. Sometimes a baby bat falls down to the ground and squeaks for help. Then the older ones swoop down and try to pick it up. If they fail to do so, it will die. Often hundreds of dead baby bats can be found lying on the ground at the foot of a tree. | 753.txt | 3 |
[
"double their number every year.",
"fight and kill a lot of themselves.",
"move from place to place constantly.",
"lose a lot of their young."
]
| Flying foxes tend to _ . | The flying fox is not a fox at all. It is an extra large bat that has got a fox's head, and that feeds on fruit instead of insects . Like all bats, flying foxes hang themselves by their toes when at rest, and travel in great crowds when out flying. A group will live in one spot for years. Sometimes several hundred of them occupy a single tree. As they return to the tree toward sunrise, they quarrel among themselves and fight for the best places until long after daylight.
Flying foxes have babies once a year, giving birth to only one at a time. At first the mother has to carry the baby on her breast wherever she goes. Later she leaves it hanging up, and brings back food for it to eat. Sometimes a baby bat falls down to the ground and squeaks for help. Then the older ones swoop down and try to pick it up. If they fail to do so, it will die. Often hundreds of dead baby bats can be found lying on the ground at the foot of a tree. | 753.txt | 3 |
[
"fly out toward the sun.",
"look for a new resting place.",
"come back to their home.",
"go out and look for food."
]
| At daybreak every day flying foxes begin to _ . | The flying fox is not a fox at all. It is an extra large bat that has got a fox's head, and that feeds on fruit instead of insects . Like all bats, flying foxes hang themselves by their toes when at rest, and travel in great crowds when out flying. A group will live in one spot for years. Sometimes several hundred of them occupy a single tree. As they return to the tree toward sunrise, they quarrel among themselves and fight for the best places until long after daylight.
Flying foxes have babies once a year, giving birth to only one at a time. At first the mother has to carry the baby on her breast wherever she goes. Later she leaves it hanging up, and brings back food for it to eat. Sometimes a baby bat falls down to the ground and squeaks for help. Then the older ones swoop down and try to pick it up. If they fail to do so, it will die. Often hundreds of dead baby bats can be found lying on the ground at the foot of a tree. | 753.txt | 2 |
[
"to occupy the best resting places.",
"only when it is dark.",
"to protect their homes from outsiders .",
"when there is not enough food."
]
| Flying foxes have fights _ . | The flying fox is not a fox at all. It is an extra large bat that has got a fox's head, and that feeds on fruit instead of insects . Like all bats, flying foxes hang themselves by their toes when at rest, and travel in great crowds when out flying. A group will live in one spot for years. Sometimes several hundred of them occupy a single tree. As they return to the tree toward sunrise, they quarrel among themselves and fight for the best places until long after daylight.
Flying foxes have babies once a year, giving birth to only one at a time. At first the mother has to carry the baby on her breast wherever she goes. Later she leaves it hanging up, and brings back food for it to eat. Sometimes a baby bat falls down to the ground and squeaks for help. Then the older ones swoop down and try to pick it up. If they fail to do so, it will die. Often hundreds of dead baby bats can be found lying on the ground at the foot of a tree. | 753.txt | 0 |
[
"They only care for their own babies.",
"They share the feeding of their young.",
"They help when a baby bat is in danger.",
"They often leave home and forget their young."
]
| How do flying foxes care for their young? | The flying fox is not a fox at all. It is an extra large bat that has got a fox's head, and that feeds on fruit instead of insects . Like all bats, flying foxes hang themselves by their toes when at rest, and travel in great crowds when out flying. A group will live in one spot for years. Sometimes several hundred of them occupy a single tree. As they return to the tree toward sunrise, they quarrel among themselves and fight for the best places until long after daylight.
Flying foxes have babies once a year, giving birth to only one at a time. At first the mother has to carry the baby on her breast wherever she goes. Later she leaves it hanging up, and brings back food for it to eat. Sometimes a baby bat falls down to the ground and squeaks for help. Then the older ones swoop down and try to pick it up. If they fail to do so, it will die. Often hundreds of dead baby bats can be found lying on the ground at the foot of a tree. | 753.txt | 2 |
[
"is of little help to make the world a better place",
"is as favorable as fighting malnutrition and disease",
"is not the first priority for us to make the world better",
"is one of the priorities for us to make the world better"
]
| According to some economists, fighting global warming | Two years ago, a Danish environmentalist called Bjorn Lomborg had an idea. We all want to makethe world a better place but, given finite resources, we should look for the most cost-effective ways ofdoing so. He persuaded a bunch of economists, including three Nobel laureates, to draw up a list ofpriorities. They found that efforts to fight malnutrition and disease would save many lives at modestexpense, whereas fighting global warming would cost a colossal amount and yield distant and uncertainrewards.
That conclusion upset a lot of environmentalists. This week, another man who upsets a lot of peopleembraced it. John Bolton, America's ambassador to the United Nations, said that Mr Lomborg' sCopenhagen Consensus provided a useful way for the world body to get its priorities straight. Too oftenat the UN, said Mr Bolton, everything is a priority. The secretary-general is charged with carrying out9,000 mandates, he said, and when you have 9,000 priorities you have none.
So, over the weekend, Mr Bolton sat down with UN diplomats from seven other countries to rank40 ways of tackling ten global crises. The problems addressed were climate change, communicablediseases, war, education, financial instability, governance, malnutrition, migration, clean water andtrade barriers.
Given a notional $ 50 billion, how would the ambassadors spend it to make the world a better place?Their conclusions were strikingly similar to the Copenhagen Consensus. After hearing presentations fromexperts on each problem, they drew up a list of priorities. The top four were basic health care, betterwater and sanitation, more schools and better nutrition for children. Averting climate change came last.
The ambassadors thought it wiser to spend money on things they knew would work. Promotingbreast-feeding, for example, costs very little and is proven to save lives. It also helps infants grow upstronger and more intelligent, which means they wilt earn more as adults. Vitamin A supplements cost aslittle as $1, save lives and stop people from going blind. And so on.
For climate change, the trouble is that though few dispute that it is occurring, no one knows howsevere it will be or what damage it will cause. And the proposed solutions are staggeringly expensive.
Mr Lomborg reckons that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh thecosts, but not until 2100. This calculation will not please A1 Gore. Nipped at the post by George Bushin 2000, Mr Gore calls global warming an onrushing catastrophe and argues vigorously that curbing itis the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind.
Mr Lomborg demurs. We need to realise that there are many inconvenient truths, he says. Butwhether he and Mr Bolton can persuade the UN of this remains to be seen. [460 words] | 1188.txt | 2 |
[
"it is reasonable to think of fighting global warming as a priority",
"if you thought that way, there would be no priority at all",
"it is a useful way for the UN to get its priorities straight",
"every mandate to be carried out is actually a priority"
]
| By saying everything is a priority, John Bolton means that | Two years ago, a Danish environmentalist called Bjorn Lomborg had an idea. We all want to makethe world a better place but, given finite resources, we should look for the most cost-effective ways ofdoing so. He persuaded a bunch of economists, including three Nobel laureates, to draw up a list ofpriorities. They found that efforts to fight malnutrition and disease would save many lives at modestexpense, whereas fighting global warming would cost a colossal amount and yield distant and uncertainrewards.
That conclusion upset a lot of environmentalists. This week, another man who upsets a lot of peopleembraced it. John Bolton, America's ambassador to the United Nations, said that Mr Lomborg' sCopenhagen Consensus provided a useful way for the world body to get its priorities straight. Too oftenat the UN, said Mr Bolton, everything is a priority. The secretary-general is charged with carrying out9,000 mandates, he said, and when you have 9,000 priorities you have none.
So, over the weekend, Mr Bolton sat down with UN diplomats from seven other countries to rank40 ways of tackling ten global crises. The problems addressed were climate change, communicablediseases, war, education, financial instability, governance, malnutrition, migration, clean water andtrade barriers.
Given a notional $ 50 billion, how would the ambassadors spend it to make the world a better place?Their conclusions were strikingly similar to the Copenhagen Consensus. After hearing presentations fromexperts on each problem, they drew up a list of priorities. The top four were basic health care, betterwater and sanitation, more schools and better nutrition for children. Averting climate change came last.
The ambassadors thought it wiser to spend money on things they knew would work. Promotingbreast-feeding, for example, costs very little and is proven to save lives. It also helps infants grow upstronger and more intelligent, which means they wilt earn more as adults. Vitamin A supplements cost aslittle as $1, save lives and stop people from going blind. And so on.
For climate change, the trouble is that though few dispute that it is occurring, no one knows howsevere it will be or what damage it will cause. And the proposed solutions are staggeringly expensive.
Mr Lomborg reckons that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh thecosts, but not until 2100. This calculation will not please A1 Gore. Nipped at the post by George Bushin 2000, Mr Gore calls global warming an onrushing catastrophe and argues vigorously that curbing itis the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind.
Mr Lomborg demurs. We need to realise that there are many inconvenient truths, he says. Butwhether he and Mr Bolton can persuade the UN of this remains to be seen. [460 words] | 1188.txt | 1 |
[
"fighting global warming is worth spending a huge amount of money on",
"promoting breast-feeding is more urgent than fighting global warming",
"averting climate change should be excluded from the list of priorities",
"there are at least 40 effective ways to tackle the top ten global crises"
]
| According to some UN diplomats, | Two years ago, a Danish environmentalist called Bjorn Lomborg had an idea. We all want to makethe world a better place but, given finite resources, we should look for the most cost-effective ways ofdoing so. He persuaded a bunch of economists, including three Nobel laureates, to draw up a list ofpriorities. They found that efforts to fight malnutrition and disease would save many lives at modestexpense, whereas fighting global warming would cost a colossal amount and yield distant and uncertainrewards.
That conclusion upset a lot of environmentalists. This week, another man who upsets a lot of peopleembraced it. John Bolton, America's ambassador to the United Nations, said that Mr Lomborg' sCopenhagen Consensus provided a useful way for the world body to get its priorities straight. Too oftenat the UN, said Mr Bolton, everything is a priority. The secretary-general is charged with carrying out9,000 mandates, he said, and when you have 9,000 priorities you have none.
So, over the weekend, Mr Bolton sat down with UN diplomats from seven other countries to rank40 ways of tackling ten global crises. The problems addressed were climate change, communicablediseases, war, education, financial instability, governance, malnutrition, migration, clean water andtrade barriers.
Given a notional $ 50 billion, how would the ambassadors spend it to make the world a better place?Their conclusions were strikingly similar to the Copenhagen Consensus. After hearing presentations fromexperts on each problem, they drew up a list of priorities. The top four were basic health care, betterwater and sanitation, more schools and better nutrition for children. Averting climate change came last.
The ambassadors thought it wiser to spend money on things they knew would work. Promotingbreast-feeding, for example, costs very little and is proven to save lives. It also helps infants grow upstronger and more intelligent, which means they wilt earn more as adults. Vitamin A supplements cost aslittle as $1, save lives and stop people from going blind. And so on.
For climate change, the trouble is that though few dispute that it is occurring, no one knows howsevere it will be or what damage it will cause. And the proposed solutions are staggeringly expensive.
Mr Lomborg reckons that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh thecosts, but not until 2100. This calculation will not please A1 Gore. Nipped at the post by George Bushin 2000, Mr Gore calls global warming an onrushing catastrophe and argues vigorously that curbing itis the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind.
Mr Lomborg demurs. We need to realise that there are many inconvenient truths, he says. Butwhether he and Mr Bolton can persuade the UN of this remains to be seen. [460 words] | 1188.txt | 1 |
[
"doubts whether climate change is occurring",
"proposes an ideal solution for climate change",
"knows clearly how severe the future climate change will be",
"questions the immediate benefits of averting climate change"
]
| Accordint to the text, Mr Lomborg | Two years ago, a Danish environmentalist called Bjorn Lomborg had an idea. We all want to makethe world a better place but, given finite resources, we should look for the most cost-effective ways ofdoing so. He persuaded a bunch of economists, including three Nobel laureates, to draw up a list ofpriorities. They found that efforts to fight malnutrition and disease would save many lives at modestexpense, whereas fighting global warming would cost a colossal amount and yield distant and uncertainrewards.
That conclusion upset a lot of environmentalists. This week, another man who upsets a lot of peopleembraced it. John Bolton, America's ambassador to the United Nations, said that Mr Lomborg' sCopenhagen Consensus provided a useful way for the world body to get its priorities straight. Too oftenat the UN, said Mr Bolton, everything is a priority. The secretary-general is charged with carrying out9,000 mandates, he said, and when you have 9,000 priorities you have none.
So, over the weekend, Mr Bolton sat down with UN diplomats from seven other countries to rank40 ways of tackling ten global crises. The problems addressed were climate change, communicablediseases, war, education, financial instability, governance, malnutrition, migration, clean water andtrade barriers.
Given a notional $ 50 billion, how would the ambassadors spend it to make the world a better place?Their conclusions were strikingly similar to the Copenhagen Consensus. After hearing presentations fromexperts on each problem, they drew up a list of priorities. The top four were basic health care, betterwater and sanitation, more schools and better nutrition for children. Averting climate change came last.
The ambassadors thought it wiser to spend money on things they knew would work. Promotingbreast-feeding, for example, costs very little and is proven to save lives. It also helps infants grow upstronger and more intelligent, which means they wilt earn more as adults. Vitamin A supplements cost aslittle as $1, save lives and stop people from going blind. And so on.
For climate change, the trouble is that though few dispute that it is occurring, no one knows howsevere it will be or what damage it will cause. And the proposed solutions are staggeringly expensive.
Mr Lomborg reckons that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh thecosts, but not until 2100. This calculation will not please A1 Gore. Nipped at the post by George Bushin 2000, Mr Gore calls global warming an onrushing catastrophe and argues vigorously that curbing itis the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind.
Mr Lomborg demurs. We need to realise that there are many inconvenient truths, he says. Butwhether he and Mr Bolton can persuade the UN of this remains to be seen. [460 words] | 1188.txt | 3 |
[
"still takes averting climate change as a priority",
"fails to realize many inconvenient truths in the world",
"has its crucial policies challenged by many member countries",
"is trying to tackle all the global crises to make the world better"
]
| It seems that the UN | Two years ago, a Danish environmentalist called Bjorn Lomborg had an idea. We all want to makethe world a better place but, given finite resources, we should look for the most cost-effective ways ofdoing so. He persuaded a bunch of economists, including three Nobel laureates, to draw up a list ofpriorities. They found that efforts to fight malnutrition and disease would save many lives at modestexpense, whereas fighting global warming would cost a colossal amount and yield distant and uncertainrewards.
That conclusion upset a lot of environmentalists. This week, another man who upsets a lot of peopleembraced it. John Bolton, America's ambassador to the United Nations, said that Mr Lomborg' sCopenhagen Consensus provided a useful way for the world body to get its priorities straight. Too oftenat the UN, said Mr Bolton, everything is a priority. The secretary-general is charged with carrying out9,000 mandates, he said, and when you have 9,000 priorities you have none.
So, over the weekend, Mr Bolton sat down with UN diplomats from seven other countries to rank40 ways of tackling ten global crises. The problems addressed were climate change, communicablediseases, war, education, financial instability, governance, malnutrition, migration, clean water andtrade barriers.
Given a notional $ 50 billion, how would the ambassadors spend it to make the world a better place?Their conclusions were strikingly similar to the Copenhagen Consensus. After hearing presentations fromexperts on each problem, they drew up a list of priorities. The top four were basic health care, betterwater and sanitation, more schools and better nutrition for children. Averting climate change came last.
The ambassadors thought it wiser to spend money on things they knew would work. Promotingbreast-feeding, for example, costs very little and is proven to save lives. It also helps infants grow upstronger and more intelligent, which means they wilt earn more as adults. Vitamin A supplements cost aslittle as $1, save lives and stop people from going blind. And so on.
For climate change, the trouble is that though few dispute that it is occurring, no one knows howsevere it will be or what damage it will cause. And the proposed solutions are staggeringly expensive.
Mr Lomborg reckons that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh thecosts, but not until 2100. This calculation will not please A1 Gore. Nipped at the post by George Bushin 2000, Mr Gore calls global warming an onrushing catastrophe and argues vigorously that curbing itis the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind.
Mr Lomborg demurs. We need to realise that there are many inconvenient truths, he says. Butwhether he and Mr Bolton can persuade the UN of this remains to be seen. [460 words] | 1188.txt | 0 |
[
"don't have modern instruments in their homes",
"refused to move from round places",
"lived in round places, but were forced to live in square houses",
"lived in round places, but then decided to move into square houses"
]
| According to the passage, the Indians _ . | I came to live here where I am now between Wounded Knee Greek and Grass Greek. Others came too, and we made these little grey houses of logs that you see, and they are square, It is a bad way to live, for there can be no power in a square.
You have noticed that everything an Indian does is in a circle, and that is because the Power of the World always works in circles, and everything tries to be round. In the old days when we were a strong and happy people, all our power came to us from the respectful circle of the nation, and so long as the circle was unbroken, the people were getting rich. The flowering tree was the living center of the circle, and the circle of the four quarters nursed it. The east gave peace and light, the south gave warmth, the west gave rain, and the north with its cold and strong wind gave strength and continuous power. This knowledge came to us from the outer world with our brief. Everything the Power of the World does is done in a circle. The sky is round, and I have heard that the earth is round like a ball, and so are all the stars. Birds make their nests in circle, for theirs are the same as ours. The sun comes forth and goes down again in a circle. The moon does the same, and both are round. Even the seasons form a great circle in their changing, and always come back again to where they were. The life of a man is a circle from childhood to childhood, and so it is in everything where power moves. Our places were like the nests of birds, and these were always set in a circle, the nation's circle, a nest of many nests, where the Great Spirit meant for us to nurse our children.
But the Wasichus (Indian word for "white people") have put us in these square boxes. Our power is gone and we are dying, for the power is not in us any more. You can look at our boys and see how it is with us. Where we were living by the power of the circle in the way we should, boys were men at twelve or thirteen years of age. But now it takes them very much longer to be bull - grown. | 2925.txt | 2 |
[
"the Indians' past and present living conditions",
"the Indians' past and modern beliefs",
"the Indians' old and new power",
"people and nature"
]
| Two things being compared in the passage are _ . | I came to live here where I am now between Wounded Knee Greek and Grass Greek. Others came too, and we made these little grey houses of logs that you see, and they are square, It is a bad way to live, for there can be no power in a square.
You have noticed that everything an Indian does is in a circle, and that is because the Power of the World always works in circles, and everything tries to be round. In the old days when we were a strong and happy people, all our power came to us from the respectful circle of the nation, and so long as the circle was unbroken, the people were getting rich. The flowering tree was the living center of the circle, and the circle of the four quarters nursed it. The east gave peace and light, the south gave warmth, the west gave rain, and the north with its cold and strong wind gave strength and continuous power. This knowledge came to us from the outer world with our brief. Everything the Power of the World does is done in a circle. The sky is round, and I have heard that the earth is round like a ball, and so are all the stars. Birds make their nests in circle, for theirs are the same as ours. The sun comes forth and goes down again in a circle. The moon does the same, and both are round. Even the seasons form a great circle in their changing, and always come back again to where they were. The life of a man is a circle from childhood to childhood, and so it is in everything where power moves. Our places were like the nests of birds, and these were always set in a circle, the nation's circle, a nest of many nests, where the Great Spirit meant for us to nurse our children.
But the Wasichus (Indian word for "white people") have put us in these square boxes. Our power is gone and we are dying, for the power is not in us any more. You can look at our boys and see how it is with us. Where we were living by the power of the circle in the way we should, boys were men at twelve or thirteen years of age. But now it takes them very much longer to be bull - grown. | 2925.txt | 0 |
[
"the four rooms of the Indian's house",
"the four kinds of natural power",
"the four seasons",
"the four directions"
]
| In the second paragraph "the four quarters" refers to _ . | I came to live here where I am now between Wounded Knee Greek and Grass Greek. Others came too, and we made these little grey houses of logs that you see, and they are square, It is a bad way to live, for there can be no power in a square.
You have noticed that everything an Indian does is in a circle, and that is because the Power of the World always works in circles, and everything tries to be round. In the old days when we were a strong and happy people, all our power came to us from the respectful circle of the nation, and so long as the circle was unbroken, the people were getting rich. The flowering tree was the living center of the circle, and the circle of the four quarters nursed it. The east gave peace and light, the south gave warmth, the west gave rain, and the north with its cold and strong wind gave strength and continuous power. This knowledge came to us from the outer world with our brief. Everything the Power of the World does is done in a circle. The sky is round, and I have heard that the earth is round like a ball, and so are all the stars. Birds make their nests in circle, for theirs are the same as ours. The sun comes forth and goes down again in a circle. The moon does the same, and both are round. Even the seasons form a great circle in their changing, and always come back again to where they were. The life of a man is a circle from childhood to childhood, and so it is in everything where power moves. Our places were like the nests of birds, and these were always set in a circle, the nation's circle, a nest of many nests, where the Great Spirit meant for us to nurse our children.
But the Wasichus (Indian word for "white people") have put us in these square boxes. Our power is gone and we are dying, for the power is not in us any more. You can look at our boys and see how it is with us. Where we were living by the power of the circle in the way we should, boys were men at twelve or thirteen years of age. But now it takes them very much longer to be bull - grown. | 2925.txt | 3 |
[
"they had to move to other houses",
"boys took more time to grow into men",
"they forgot the old way of life",
"everyone was not happy"
]
| According to the author, once the Indians moved into square houses, _ . | I came to live here where I am now between Wounded Knee Greek and Grass Greek. Others came too, and we made these little grey houses of logs that you see, and they are square, It is a bad way to live, for there can be no power in a square.
You have noticed that everything an Indian does is in a circle, and that is because the Power of the World always works in circles, and everything tries to be round. In the old days when we were a strong and happy people, all our power came to us from the respectful circle of the nation, and so long as the circle was unbroken, the people were getting rich. The flowering tree was the living center of the circle, and the circle of the four quarters nursed it. The east gave peace and light, the south gave warmth, the west gave rain, and the north with its cold and strong wind gave strength and continuous power. This knowledge came to us from the outer world with our brief. Everything the Power of the World does is done in a circle. The sky is round, and I have heard that the earth is round like a ball, and so are all the stars. Birds make their nests in circle, for theirs are the same as ours. The sun comes forth and goes down again in a circle. The moon does the same, and both are round. Even the seasons form a great circle in their changing, and always come back again to where they were. The life of a man is a circle from childhood to childhood, and so it is in everything where power moves. Our places were like the nests of birds, and these were always set in a circle, the nation's circle, a nest of many nests, where the Great Spirit meant for us to nurse our children.
But the Wasichus (Indian word for "white people") have put us in these square boxes. Our power is gone and we are dying, for the power is not in us any more. You can look at our boys and see how it is with us. Where we were living by the power of the circle in the way we should, boys were men at twelve or thirteen years of age. But now it takes them very much longer to be bull - grown. | 2925.txt | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.