Mountain View, Calif.—The humanities are kaput

Directions: Write an essay of 160-200 words based on the following drawing. In your essay

A. Have a backup plan B. Create separate spheres immediately C. Work somewhere else first D

Directions: Suppose your friend Susan is going to graduate and wants to have an internship in a co

AnthropologistshavelongspeculatedthatearlyhumansmayhavematedwithNeanderthals,butthelateststudyprovidesthestrongestevidencesofar,suggestingthatsuchencounterstookplacearound60,000yearsagointheMiddleEast.Small,pioneeringgroupsofmodernhumansbegantoleaveAfrica80,000yearsagoandreachedlandoccupiedbytheNeanderthalsastheyspreadintoEurasia.ThetwomayhavelivedalongsideeachotherinsmallgroupsuntiltheNeanderthalsdiedout30,000yearsago.ScientistsledbySvantetookfouryearstosequencethewholeNeanderthalgenomefrompowderedbonefragmentstakenfromthreefemaleswholivedinEurope40,000yearsago.ToseehowsimilartheNeanderthalwastomodernhumans,theteamcomparedtheancientDNAwiththegenomesoffivepeoplefromFrance,China,southernAfrica,westernAfricaandPapuaNewGuinea.Thestudyisthefirsttoattemptawhole-genomecomparisonbetweenNeanderthalsandmodernhumans.TheresearchersfoundthatmodernhumansandNeanderthalsshared99.7%oftheirDNA,whichwasinheritedfromacommonancestor400,000yearsago.FurtheranalysisrevealedthatNeanderthalsweremorecloselyrelatedtomodernhumanswholeftAfricathantothedescendantsofthosewhostayed.Between1%and4%oftheDNAinmodernEuropeans,AsiansandthoseasfarafieldasPapuaNewGuinea,wasinheritedfromNeanderthals."ThoseofuswholiveoutsideAfricacarryalittleNeanderthalinus,"saidProfessor"NeanderthalsprobablymixedwithearlymodernhumansbeforeHomosapienssplitintodifferentgroupsinEuropeandAsia.Thecomparisonofthesetwogeneticsequencesenablesustofindoutwhereourgenomediffersfromthatofourclosestrelative."InterbreedingbetweenhumansandNeanderthalsmaynonethelesshavebeenrare.JusttwoNeanderthalfemalesinagroupofaroundahundredhumanswouldhavebeenenoughtoleavesuchatraceinourgenome,providedthatwasthegroupthatgaverisetoallmodernhumansoutsideAfrica.ThestudywasgreetedbyscientistsasalmostcertainconfirmationthatmodernhumansandNeanderthalsmatedwhenthegroupscrossedpaths."Itcertainlytellsussomethingabouthumannature,"saidChrisStringer,headofhumanoriginsattheNaturalHistoryMuseuminLondon.EdGreen,aseniorauthoronthestudysaid:"Howthesepeopleswouldhaveinteractedculturallyisnotsomethingwecanspeculateoninanymeaningfulway.Butknowingthattherewasgeneflowisimportant,anditisfascinatingtothinkabouthowthatmayhavehappened."

A

It's well known that being bilingual has cognitive benefits: switching between two languages has bee

"Ah, yes, divorce", Robin Williams once mused

In the 1950s

Directions: Your friend is going to take a tour in the place you live

A. The study

Tourism

"The impulse to excess among young Britons remains as powerful as ever, but the force that used to keep the impulse in check has all but disappeared," claimed a newspaper. Legislation that made it easier to get hold of a drink was "an Act for the increase of drunkenness and immorality", asserted a politician. The first statement comes from 2005, the second from 1830. On both occasions, the object of scorn was a parliamentary bill that promised to sweep away " antiquated" licensing laws. As liberal regulations came into force this week, Britons on both sides of the debate unwittingly followed a 19th-century script. Reformers then, as now, took a benign view of human nature. Make booze cheaper and more readily available, said the liberalisers, and drinkers would develop sensible, continental European-style ways. Nonsense, retorted the critics. Habits are hard to change; if Britons can drink easily, they will drink more. Worryingly for modern advocates of liberalisation, earlier doomsayers turned out to be right. Between 1820 and 1840, consumption of malt (which is used to make beer) increased by more than 50%. Worse, Britons developed a keener taste for what Thomas Carlyle called "liquid madness"—gin and other spirits. The backlash was fierce. Critics pointed to widespread debauchery in the more disreputable sections of the working class. They were particularly worried about the people who, in a later age, came to be known as "ladettes". An acute fear, says Virginia Berridge, who studies temperance at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, was that women would pass on their sinful ways to their children. In the 19th century, temperance organisations set up their own newspapers to educate the public about the consequences of excess. That, at least, has changed: these days, the mainstream media rail against the demon drink all by themselves. According to the text, the phrase "the second" in the second paragraph refers to______.

Living alone doesn't necessarily make you lonely. But it certainly doesn't help

Genetically engineered crops are safe for humans and animals to eat and have not caused increases in cancer, obesity, gastrointestinal illnesses, kidney disease, autism or allergies, an exhaustive report from the National Academies of Science released Tuesday found. Overall, genetically engineered (GE) crops saved farmers in the United States money but didn't appear to increase crop yields. They have lowered pest populations in some areas, especially in the Midwest but increased the number of herbicide-resistant weeds in others. There's also no evidence that GE crops have affected the population of monarch butterflies, the report said. To gauge whether foods made from genetically modified crops were safe for human consumption, the committee compared disease reports from the United States and Canada, where such crops have been consumed since the mid-1990s, and those in the United Kingdom and western Europe, where they are not widely eaten. No long-term pattern of increase in specific health problems after the introduction of GE foods in the 1990s in the United States and Canada was found. There was no correlation between obesity or Type Ⅱ diabetes and the consumption of GE foods. Celiac disease, which makes humans intolerant of gluten, increased in both populations. Patterns in the increase in autism spectrum disorder in children were similar in both the United Kingdom and the United States, the committee reported., Overall the report concluded that there were no differences in terms of a higher risk to human health between foods made from GE crops and those made from conventionally-bred crops. Food Water Watch, a government accountability group in Washington D.C., said the committee's ties to the biotech industry and other corporations create conflicts of interest and raise questions about the independence of its work. "Critics have long been marginalized," said Wenonah Hauter, the group's executive director. A significant portion of American consumers are concerned about the safety or other effects of foods made with genetically modified crops, often called GMOs for genetically modified organisms. A survey released last year by the NPD Group, a market research firm, found that 57% of Americans were concerned that genetically modified foods posed a health hazard. The food industry has taken notice. In 2015, Progressive Grocer, a trade publication, reported that total U.S. sales of food and beverage products labeled "non-GMO" reached $10 billion during 2014. The National Academies report will likely not sway these consumers, said Phil Lempert, a Los Angeles-based food industry analyst. "It's an emotional issue, it's not a science issue," he said. What the report from the National Academies of Science finds is got by ______.

In the last ten years

The description about the planets has been a long time. Three centuries have passed since the polymath Sir Christopher Wren predicted that "A time will come 1 men will stretch out their eyes—they should see planets like our Earth." 2 most astronomers' accounts, that time is just about nigh. Most exoplanets (外行星) have been discovered by inferring their 3 from their gravity imparts on their home star. The problem is that this method 4 the discovery of large planets close to their stars. To find places that might 5 life, it is possible to look for planets a little 6 away from their stars. But it isn't easy. Astronomers have 7 solved the problem of looking at objects near to a star's bright 8 by inventing the coronagraph (日冕观测仪). 9 exoplanet hunting that is not quite good enough. A (an) 10 approach plays with the peaks and troughs of the light waves to do the job more 11 . This week, in em>Nature/em>, Eugene Serabyn of the Jet 12 Laboratory in California and his colleagues describe a 13 implementation of what is known as an optical vortex coronagraph. This 14 the starlight more effectively, making it easier to see any 15 planets. In order for this technique to work, the distortions 16 on the incoming light during its 17 through the Earth's atmosphere will be removed using a 18 called "wave front correction". The researchers did this using a small part of the giant Hale telescope in California, with which they 19 a star called HR 8799 in the constellation of Pegasus. It was the first time exoplanets had been directly observed and their telescope was in 20 five times smaller than the telescopes used in the past. Those new techniques mean that more ways could be employed to finally fulfill Wren's prediction.

In 1959 the average American family paid $989 for a year's supply of food

Fat: what is it good for? Absolutely nothing

Crying is hardly an activity encouraged by society. Tears, whether they are of sorrow, anger, or joy, typically make Americans feel uncomfortable and embarrassed. The shedder of tears is likely to apologize, even when a devastating tragedy was the provocation. The observer of tears is likely to do everything possible to put an end to the emotional outpouring. But judging from recent studies of crying behavior, links between illness and crying and the chemical composition of tears, both those responses to tears are often inappropriate and may even be counterproductive. Humans are the only animals definitely known to shed emotiomal tears. Since evolution has given rise to few, if any, purposeless physiological responses, it is logical to assume that crying has one or more functions that enhance survival. Although some observers have suggested that crying is a way to elicit assistance from others (as a crying baby might from its mother), the shedding of tears is hardly necessary to get help. Vocal cries would have been quite enough, more likely than tears to gain attention. So, it appears, there must be something special about tears themselves. Indeed, the new studies suggest that emotional tears may play a direct role in alleviating stress. University of Minnesota researchers who are studying the chemical composition of tears have recently isolated two important chemicals from emotional tears. Both chemicals are found only in tears that are shed in response to emotion. Tears shed because of exposure to cut onion would contain no such substance. Researchers at several other institutions are investigating the usefulness of tears as a means of diagnosing human ills and monitoring drugs. At Tulane University's Tear Analysis Laboratory Dr. Peter Kastl and his colleagues report that they can use tears to detect drug abuse and exposure to medication, to determine whether a contact lens fits properly of why it may be uncomfortable, to study the causes of "dry eye" syndrome and the effects of eye surgery, and perhaps even to measure exposure to environmental pollutants. At Columbia University Dt. Liasy Faris and colleagues are studying tears for clues to the diagnosis of diseases away from the eyes. Tears can be obtained painlessly without invading the body and only tiny amounts are needed to perform highly refined analyses. It is known from the first paragraph that