单选题Nell Barrett's remarks are quoted to show______.

单选题Go Ask Alice as mentioned in the passage is______.

单选题What's the world's greatest moral challenge, as judged by its capacity to inflict human tragedy? It is not, I think, global warming, whose effects—if they become as grim as predicted—will occur over many years and provide societies time to adapt. A case can be made for preventing nuclear proliferation, which threatens untold deaths and a collapse of the world economy. But the most urgent present moral challenge, I submit, is the most obvious: global poverty. The solution to being poor is getting rich. It's economic growth. We know this. The mystery is why all societies have not adopted the obvious remedies. Just recently, the 21-member Commission on Growth and Development examined the puzzle. Since 1950, the panel found, 13 economies have grown at an average annual rate of 7 percent for at least 25 years. The panel identified five common elements of success: Openness to global trade and, usually, an eagerness to attract foreign investment; political stability and "capable" governments "committed" to economic growth; high rates of saving and investment, usually at least 25 percent of national income; economic stability, keeping government budgets and inflation under control and avoiding a broad collapse in production; a willingness to "let markets allocate resources," meaning that governments didn't try to run industry. Of course, qualifications abound, still, broad lessons are clear. Globalization works. Countries don't get rich by staying isolated. Those that embrace trade and foreign investment acquire know-how and technologies, can buy advanced products abroad, and are forced to improve their competitiveness. The transmission of new ideas and products is faster than ever. There is a role for foreign aid, technical assistance and charity in relieving global poverty. But it is a small role. It can improve health, alleviate suffering from natural disasters or wars, and provide some types of skills. But it cannot single: handedly stimulate the policies and habits that foster self-sustaining growth. Japan and China have grown rapidly not because they received foreign aid but because they pursued pro-growth policies and embraced pro-growth values. The hard question is why all societies haven't adopted them. One reason is politics; some regimes are more interested in preserving their power and privileges than in promoting growth. But the larger answer, I think, is culture, as Lawrence Harrison of Tufts University argues. Traditional values, social systems or religious views are often hostile to risk-taking, wealth accumulation and economic growth. In his latest book, Harrison contends that politics can alter culture, hut it isn't easy. Globalization has moral as well as economic and political dimensions. The United States and other wealthy countries are experiencing an anti-globalization backlash. Americans and others are entitled to defend themselves from economic harm, but many of the allegations against globalization are wildly exaggerated. By making globalization an all-purpose scapegoat for economic complaints, many "progressives" are actually undermining the most powerful force for eradicating global poverty.

单选题The scarcity of TV selection according to the text

单选题What can we infer from paragraph five in this passage?______

单选题According to the second paragraph, it can be found by researchers that______.

单选题Fear seems to be the dominant mood of the moment. Hurricanes, tidal waves, floods, earthquakes and terrorism this year have all brought with them not only appalling scenes of devastation, death and suffering, but also outrage at the lack of preparations to avoid or cope with these disasters. Now even the birds of the air are a threat, we are told. That migrating flock visible on the horizon at sunset, once a consoling reminder of the eternal rhythms of nature, could be carrying the virus which might soon kill tens of millions of people. Given the many fingers pointed at governments in the wake of other disasters this year, it is hardly surprising that they are scrambling to respond to the threat posed by avian influenza. After confirmation this week that the H5N1 strain of bird flu, which has been spreading quickly in Asia, had been discovered in Romania and perhaps Greece, European Union foreign ministers convened an emergency meeting. President George Bush, still smarting from a torrent of criticism of his government's clumsy response to Hurricane Katrina, has promised to rush out emergency plans for dealing with an outbreak of pandemic flu which have been stalled for years. Countries around the world are hurrying to stockpile the only current antiviral drug, Tamiflu, which might be effective in saving lives in any pandemic or curbing its spread. The World Health Organisation is calling for an internationally co-ordinated effort. Health ministers from around the globe are due to meet next week in Canada to discuss what steps to take. Is any of this effort justified? Or are politicians simply helping to feed public panic, and then covering themselves by promising to spend lavishly against a threat which may never materialize and to reduce a risk which they do not understand? To ask these questions is not to counsel complacency, but to apply the kind of test which is required in any kind of disaster planning, not least because the world is an inherently dangerous place and it is impossible to plan against every possible disaster. With the media full of warnings of impending mass death, an overreaction is all too possible.

单选题Which of the following states the major difference between oxidation and fire?

单选题{{B}}Text 3{{/B}} It may turn out that the "digital divide"—one of the most fashionable political slogans of recent years—is largely fiction. As you will recall, the argument went well beyond the unsurprising notion that the rich would own more computers than the poor. The disturbing part of the theory was that society was dividing itself into groups of technology "haves" and "have-nots" and that this segregation would, in turn, worsen already large economic inequalities. It is this argument that is either untrue or wildly exaggerated. We should always have been suspicious. After all, computers have spread quickly because they have become cheaper to buy and easier to use. Falling prices and skill requirements suggest that the digital divide would spontaneously shrink—and so it has. Now, a new study further discredits the digital divide. The study, by economist David Card of the University of California, Berkeley, challenges the notion that computers have significantly worsened wage inequality. The logic of how this supposedly happens is straightforward: computers raise the demand for high-skilled workers, increasing their wages. Meanwhile, computerization—by automating many routine tasks—reduces the demand for low-skilled workers and, thereby, their wages. The gap between the two widens. Superficially, wage statistics support the theory. Consider the ratio between workers near the top of the wage distribution and those near the bottom. Computerization increased; so did the wage gap. But wait, point out Card and DiNardo. The trouble with blaming computers is that the worsening of inequality occurred primarily in the early 1980s. With computer use growing, the wage gap should have continued to expand, if it was being driven by a shifting demand for skills. Indeed, Card and DiNardo find much detailed evidence that contradicts the theory. They conclude that computerization does not explain "the rise in U.S. wage inequality in the last quarter of the 20th century." The popular perception of computers' impact on wages is hugely overblown. Lots of other influences count for as much, or more. The worsening of wage inequality in the early 1980s, for example, almost certainly reflected the deep 1981—1982 recession and the fall of inflation. Companies found it harder to raise prices. To survive, they concluded that they had to hold down the wages of their least skilled, least mobile and youngest workers. The "digital divide" suggested a simple solution (computers) for a complex problem (poverty). With more computer access, the poor could escape their lot. But computers never were the source of anyone's poverty and, as for escaping, what people do for themselves matters more than what technology can do for them.

单选题Even to his contemporaries, Rochester was a legendary figure One of the youngest and most handsome courtiers of the restored Charles Ⅱ. he was the favorite of a king whose wit, lasciviousness and serious intellectual interests he shared. He was banished from court several times, but Charles's pleasure in his conversation always resulted in his recall. His authentic adventures included the attempted abduction of an heiress (whom he later married), smashing a phallic-shaped sundial in the royal gardens during a drunken celebrity, and a violent quarrel with the watch at Epsom in which one of his companions was killed. Quite apart from his reputation as a poet. he was feted in the writings of his friends, notably in Sir George Etherege's comedy, "The Man of Mode". Just before he died in 1680. at the age of 33. destroyed by alcoholism and syphilis. Rochester's legend took a surprising turn. After a series of conversations with an Anglican rationalist divine. Gilbert Burner, the skeptical libertine made a death- bed conversion which was celebrated in the devotional literature of the succeeding century. Charming as it is. the Rochester legend has always been a distraction It has resulted in many apocryphal stories and uncertain attributions, and it can still divert attention from the poetry. It is Rochester's achievement as a poet which commands our interest and makes him something more than a luridly colorful period, figure. For all the brevity of his career, Rochester is a crucial figure in the development of English verse satire and file Horatian epistle, a student of his elder French contemporary Boileau. and an important exemplar for later poets as different as Alexander Pope and Anne Finch, Countess of Winchilsea. Cephas Goldsworthy's "The Satyr" gives us the legend. Although there are no footnotes to sources, the book shows some acquaintance with modem Rochester scholarship and its rejection of spurious verse from his canon—but only intermittently. Anecdotes concerning Rochester and his crony George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham. are retailed without any indication that they have, in fact. been discredited; poems no longer attributed to Rochester are cited as if they were authentic. Mr. Goldsworthy quotes liberally from the poetry, but repeatedly reads it as straightforward autobiography. For example, we are told that "My dear mistress has a heart" is addressed to. Elizabeth Barry, an actress, which is incautious given the uncertain dating of this song, and indeed of most of Rochester's poems. More generally, while of course some of the satires include references to actual persons, as often as not in 17th-century love poetry the emotion is genuine but the addressee is fictitious. A less simplistic way to relate Rochester's poetry to his life would be to read the former as an exploiation of what it means to live according to libertine values. In his best satires and even some of the lyrics he articulated an anti-rational .nihilistic vision scarcely found elsewhere in English verse. Such a task belongs to a critical biography. There is no mistaking Mr. Goldsworthy's enthusiasm for his subject, but his book is essentially biography as entertainment.

单选题According to the author, applying biotechnology to industry

单选题The title of the biography The American Civil War Fighting for the Lady could hardly be more provocative. Thomas Keneally, an Australian writer, is unapologetic. In labeling a hero of the American civil war a notorious scoundrel he switches the spotlight from the brave actions of Dan Sickles at the battle of Gettysburg to his earlier premeditated murder, of the lover of his young and pretty Italian-American wife, Teresa. It is not the murder itself that disgusts Mr Keneally but Sickles's treatment of his wife afterwards, and how his behavior mirrored the hypocritical misogyny of 19th-century America. The murder victim, Philip Barton Key, Teresa Sickles's lover, came from a famous old southern family. He was the nephew of the then chief justice of the American Supreme Court and the son of the writer of the country's national anthem. Sickles, a Tammany Hall politician in New York turned Democratic congressman in Washington, shot Key dead in 1859 at a corner of Lafayette Square, within shouting distance of the White House. But the murder trial was melodramatic, even by the standards of the day. With the help of eight lawyers, Sickles was found not guilty after using the novel plea of "temporary insanity". The country at large was just as forgiving, viewing Key's murder as a gallant crime of passion. Within three years, Sickles was a general on the Unionist side in the American civil' War and, as a new friend of Abraham and Mary Lincoln, a frequent sleepover guest at the White House. Mrs Sickles was less fortunate. She was shunned by friends she had made as the wife of a rising politician. Her husband, a serial adulterer whose many mistresses included; Queen Isabella II of Spain and the madamof an industrialized New York whorehouse, refused to be seen in her company. Laura, the Sickles's daughter, was an innocent victim of her father's vindictiveness and eventually died of drink in the Bowery district of New York. Sickles's bold actions at Gettysburg are, in their own way, just as controversial. Argument continues to rage among scholars, as to whether he helped the Union to victory or nearly caused its defeat when he moved his forces out of line to occupy what he thought was better ground. James Longstreet, the Confederate general who led the attack against the new position, was in no doubt about the brilliance of the move. Mr Keneally is better known as a novelist. Here he shows himself just as adept at biography, and achieves both his main aims. He restores the reputation of Teresa Sickles, "this beautiful, pleasant and intelligent girl", and breathes full and controversial life into a famous military engagement.

单选题{{B}}Text 4{{/B}} A friend of mine had a grandfather who supervised the payroll at a large company long ago. People who knew him say this man was a paragon of virtue when it came to making sure the employees were treated fair and square on every payday. But he also believed that once wages were disbursed, workers should take full responsibility for their financial security. In his view, honest labor and thrifty habits were basic elements of the free-enterprise system. Nobody should expect any money unless they earned it. He opposed company pension plans, and was thoroughly dismayed by the fiscal structure and benefits of Social Security. I wonder how many people hold the same views now. The debate about changing Social Security is part of a larger question: What obligation, if any, do Americans feel toward fellow citizens who need help? Note, I didn't say "less fortunate," "disadvantaged," or some other term that might be construed as evidence I'm promoting my own brand of social engineering. I just want to know how much concern people have for what happens outside their own households. Critics of government assistance programs often say they do more harm than good by creating a cycle of dependency for recipients and a gigantic bureaucracy that demoralizes the rest of society by taking money away from us and creating a welfare state of slackers. The term I prefer to describe our current situation is "safety-net culture." It has lots of problems, but I also know what life was like before safety nets, because my dad gave me abundant testimony from his 1920s boyhood near San Francisco—it was no Norman Rockwell painting. His father worked for the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, so they did have a house. But one neighbor lived in a tent on a vacant lot and another was known for owning only one pair of overalls, which his wife laundered in a tub on the stove on Saturdays while he sat by, wrapped in a blanket. My dad's family often ate boiled rice for breakfast. The beverage of choice was tea, but if that ran out they made "silver tea"— hot water with milk and sugar. Money for college wasn't in the family budget. My dad got his degree thanks to the GI Bill. Decades of safety-net culture have removed a lot of anxiety from our lives but we're still not dose to Utopia. Amid all the Social Security debate about aging baby boomers and shrinking worker contributions, I'm most compelled by this statistic: Close to 20 percent of retirees get all of their income from Social Security. Should that number be a source of national pride or embarrassment? Or perhaps a better question: How do you honestly feel about drinking silver tea during your golden years?