英译汉 Directions: There are 2 passages in this section. Each passage is followed by some questions or unfinished statements. For each of them there are four choices marked A, B, C and D. You should decide on the best choice and mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the center. The announcement that England's mad cow disease was involved in 10 cases of a fatal human brain disorder has been met with understandable hysteria (歇斯底里). The market for British beef collapsed; 100,000 farmers' jobs are in jeopardy (危险); and the government is trying to defuse (去除) a crisis that could cause billions of dollars in losses. But what is striking about the situation is how sharply the decisive public reaction to the crisis contrasts with the cautious language in the announcement. Scientists said consumption of contaminated (污染) beef was "the most likely explanation" for 10 cases of a similar human illness called Creutzeldt-Jakob disease—nothing more definite than that. The crisis is a telling example of a phenomenon occurring ever more frequently. A complex scientific debate is suddenly thrust upon an anxious public that is ill-equipped to understand it. Instant communications, combined with the greater willingness of government and industry leaders to go public with their scientific disputes, trigger (引发) concern. The core of real science gets overwhelmed by a flurry (一阵，波动) of "junk science"—conflicting statements by politicians, confusing press reports, legal depositions, even dueling (决斗的) advertisements. The real problem is the nature of scientific inquiry, which inevitably involves uncertainty. Researchers cannot say conclusively whether mad cow disease poses a risk to humans. They don't know the extent of the epidemic (传染病) or how it can be stopped. Indeed, they can't even agree on the cause. "This is tremendously difficult for the public to sort out. If scientists are disagreeing, what's the citizen to presume (相信)?" asks Paul Slovic, an American psychologist at Decision Research in Eugene. One lesson to be drawn from the mad cow crisis is that governments shouldn't cut funding for basic research, which can help prevent tomorrow's crises. But the only real solution is for government and industry leaders to use scientific information responsibly. Unresolved scientific disputes have become a fact of modern life. Nothing else so clearly illustrates science's limits. 1.The announcement indicating the connection between the mad cow disease and the fatal human brain disorder has brought about （ ）. A、a drastic (迅猛的) decline in beef consumption B、unemployment of 100,000 farmers C、the British government decisive action to prevent future crisis D、scientific disputes concerning the nature of Creutzeldt-Jakob 2.We can infer from the article that Creutzeldt-Jakob disease （ ）. A、is an epidemic fatal to humans as well as to cattle B、is caused by eating contaminated beef C、is incurable but preventable D、is still under scientific investigation 3.To the author, the way in which the public reacted to the announcement is （ ）. A、incomprehensible B、ridiculous C、justifiable D、illogical 4.In the author's opinion, which of the following should NOT be held responsible for the crisis? （ ） A、Uncertainty in explaining the cause of the human brain disorder. B、Irresponsibility of government officials in using scientific information. C、Misleading news reports written by journalists. D、Advertisements and news reports written by journalists. 5.Which of the following does the author regard as the most important in preventing future crises of this kind? （ ） A、The government should give more money to basic research. B、The public should not be officially given scientific information that might lead to confusion. C、Advertisers should use more cautious language in promoting new products. D、Scientists should settle their disputes before informing the public of their discoveries.