单选题{{B}}Text 3{{/B}} Ever since they were first staged in 19th century Europe, world's fairs have enabled people from around the globe to visit wondrous pavilions where they can discover distant lands and new technologies. The 2006 world's fair is no exception, but it also has a decidedly new-era twist: the whole event happens in cyberspace. A nonprofit project dreamed up by Americans Carl Malamud, a computer consultant, and Vinton Cerf, and Internet pioneer and telecommunications company Vice president, the Internet 2006 World Exposition is a digital work in progress, a multi-chambered forum that cybernauts can help build and renovate throughout the year--and perhaps long after the fair's official close in December. While high-tech pavilions set up by sponsoring corporations are featured prominently, as in real fairs, this virtual exposition is closer in spirit and reality to {{U}}a vast bustling bazaar,{{/U}} a marketplace for the talents and offerings of thousands of individuals and small groups. Anyone with a computer and a modem can not only "attend" but also participate as an exhibitor by creating an individual multimedia Website. Getting the fair up and running was by no means easy. Malamud, 36, spent the past year shuttling among 30 countries, lobbying companies that initially dismissed the project as unwieldy and unworkable. While some nations immediately supported the idea, others completely missed the point of Malamud's vision: to make the fair a public-works project that focuses on what the Internet can offer expert or novice. Once grass-roots groups started backing the project, though, businesses were not far behind. By donating equipment and services, these companies will gain access to millions of potential consumers eager to see the firms' latest technologies. Since the exposition's Jan. 1 launch, as many as 40,000 visitors each day from more than 40 countries have tried the major Websites. Most virtual visitors log on from the U. S and Japan, but the United Arab Emirates, Sweden, Singapore and Estonia have been represented. Comments logged in the fair's guest book are overwhelmingly positive. "Wow, the world is shrinking," wrote a visitor from the Netherlands. Since their initial hesitancy, the major sponsors-primarily telecommunications and software companies--have become firm believers. Beyond the diversity of content and international scope, the fair is a technological marvel. The fastest international link ever installed, this pipeline could be the first step toward laying a permanent network that will eventually hardwire every nation in the world into the Internet. The organizers hope that the infrastructure--and awareness-nurtured by this exposition will launch a boom in Net use.

单选题The main interest of travel agencies dealing with travel medicine is to

单选题The amount of greenhouse gases we've already pumped into the atmosphere has irreversibly bound us to a certain amount of warming over the next several decades. That means climate change isn't a problem for tomorrow—the effects are happening now. Already raining patterns seem to be changing, making some drier areas even drier, and rainy regions even wetter. As warmer temperatures creep northward, so do insects and other pests that are adapted to the heat. The population of the tiny mountain pine beetle, which infests pine trees in the Rocky Mountain region, used to be controlled by freezing winters. But as temperatures have warmed over the past decade, the mountain pine beetle's territory has spread, destroying millions of acres of Canadian pines. The pine beetle infestation represents the unique challenges that warming will pose for land conservation managers on the front lines of the battle against it. Generations of American conservationists have fought to preserve wildlife and to keep nature pure in the face of a growing population and pollution. But global warming threatens to change all that, by altering the very foundation on which the conservation movement was built. What good is a wildlife reserve if the protected animals can't live there, because climate change pushes them out? What difference does it make to defend trees from logging, if global warming will allow a new pest to ruin the whole forests? The answer is to adapt the way we practice wildlife and land conservation to climate change There's a term for this—adaptive management. We need to begin making moves today to adapt to changes that warming will bring decades hence. " Climate change will affect anything, you name it, " said Lara Hansen of EcoAdapt. " We need to change the way we allocate resources and protect livelihoods. " That means that the way we've been carrying out conservation—picking the right land spaces and playing goalie—won't work anymore, as climate change keeps moving the target. Conservationists will have to work even harder, trying to minimize non-climate-related threats to land and species even as the human population grows by billions. Regardless of what we do, the changes will be coming last and the future will bring increased drought, heat waves, rainstorms, extinctions and more. We need to begin cutting our carbon immediately, but we need to adapt now as well. The world is changing because of us; to save what's left, we'll have to change too.

单选题The extent of a nation's power over its coastal ecosystems and the natural resources in its coastal waters has been defined by two international law doctrines, freedom of the seas and adjacent state sovereignty. Until the mid-twentieth century, most nations favored application of broad open-seas freedoms and limited sovereign rights over coastal waters. A nation had the right to include within its territorial dominion only a very narrow band of coastal waters (generally extending three miles from the shoreline), within which it had the authority, but not the responsibility, to regulate all activities. But, because this area of territorial dominion was so limited, most nations did not establish rules for management or protection of their territorial waters. Regardless of whether or not nations enforced regulations in their territorial waters, large ocean areas remained free of controls or restrictions. The citizens of all nations had the right to use these unrestricted ocean areas for any innocent purpose, including navigation and fishing. Except for controls over its own citizens, no nation had the responsibility to control such activities in international waters. And, since there were few standards of conduct that applied on the "open seas," there were few jurisdictional conflicts between nations. The lack of standards is traceable to popular perceptions held before the middle of this century. By and large, marine pollution was not perceived as a significant problem, in part because the adverse effect of coastal activities on ocean ecosystems was not widely recognized, and pollution caused by human activities was generally believed to be limited to that caused by navigation. Moreover, the freedom to fish, or over-fish, was an essential element of the traditional legal doctrine of freedom of the seas that no maritime country wished to see limited. And finally, the technology that later allowed exploitation of other ocean resources, such as oil, did not yet exist. To date, controlling pollution and regulating ocean resources have still not been comprehensively addressed by law, but two recent developments may actually lead to future international rules providing for ecosystem management. First, the establishment of extensive fishery zones, extending territorial authority as far as 200 miles out from a country's coast, has provided the opportunity for nations individually to manage larger ecosystems. This opportunity, combined with national self-interest in maintaining fish populations, could lead nations to reevaluate policies for management of their fisheries and to address the problem of pollution in territorial waters. Second, the international community is beginning to understand the importance of preserving the resources and ecology of international waters and to show signs of accepting responsibility for doing so. Thus it will become more likely that international standards and policies for broader regulation of human activities that affect ocean ecosystems will be adopted and implemented.

单选题A former head of UN is quoted in

单选题{{B}}Directions:{{/B}}Read the following text. Choose the best word(s) for each numbered blank and mark A, B, C, and D on ANSWER SHEET 1. What would happen if consumers decided to simplify their lives and spend less on material goods and services? This{{U}} (1) {{/U}}is taking on a certain urgency as rates of economic growth continue to decelerate throughout the industrialized world, and{{U}} (2) {{/U}}millions of consumers appear to be{{U}} (3) {{/U}}for more frugal lifestyle. The Stanford Research Institute, which has done some of the most extensive work on the frugality phenomenon,{{U}} (4) {{/U}}that nearly five million American adults number "{{U}} (5) {{/U}}to and act on some but not all" of its basic tenets. The frugality phenomenon first achieved prominence as a middle-class{{U}} (6) {{/U}}of high-consumption lifestyle in the industrial world during the 50's and 60's. In the Silent Revolution, Ronald Ingehart of the University of Michingan' s Institute of Social Research examined this{{U}} (7) {{/U}}in the United States and 10 Western European nations. He concluded that a change has taken place "from an{{U}} (8) {{/U}}emphasis on material well-being and physical security{{U}} (9) {{/U}}greater emphasis on the quality of life", that is, "a{{U}} (10) {{/U}}from materialism to post-materialism". Inglehart calls the 60s the "fat year". Among their more visible trappings were the ragged blue jeans favored by the affluent young. Most of them{{U}} (11) {{/U}}from materialism; however, this was{{U}} (12) {{/U}}. Comfortably fixed Americans were going{{U}} (13) {{/U}},{{U}} (14) {{/U}}making things last longer, sharing things with others, learning to do things for themselves and so on. But{{U}} (15) {{/U}}economically significant, it was hardly{{U}} (16) {{/U}}in a US Gross National Product climbing vigorously toward the ＄ 2 thousand billion mark. {{U}} (17) {{/U}}, as the frugality phenomenon matured--growing out of the soaring 80s and into the somber 90s--it seemed to undergo a{{U}} (18) {{/U}}transformation. American consumers continued to lose{{U}} (19) {{/U}}in materialism and were being joined by new converts who were {{U}}(20) {{/U}}frugality because of the darkening economic skies they saw ahead.

单选题 How could anybody dislike the notion of fairness? Everything is better when it is fair: a share, a fight, a maiden, or a game. Even defeat sounds more attractive when it is fair and square. For the British fair play is especially important: without it, life isn't cricket. Their country becomes quite pleasant when the weather is fair, though unfortunately it rarely is. And these days fairtrade goods crowd their supermarket shelves. Fairness is not only good, but also moderate, which is another characteristic that the British approve of. It does not claim too much for itself. Those who, on inquiry, admit that their health and fortunes are fair-to-middling navigate carefully between the twin dangers of boastfulness and ill-temperedness, while gesturing in a chin-up sort of way towards the possibility of future improvement. Fairness appeals to the British political class, for it has a common sense down-to-earthiness which avoids the grandiosity of American and continental European political discourse while aspiring to do its best for all men-and of course for maidens too, fair and otherwise, for one of its virtues is that it does not discriminate on grounds of either gender or skin colour. Not surprising, then, that Britain's government should grab hold of the word and cling to it in the buffeting the coalition has had since the budget on June 22nd proposed higher taxes and even sharper spending cuts. "Tough but fair" is what George Osborne, the Conservative chancellor of the exchequer, called the cuts he announced. "It is going to be tough, but it is also very fair," said Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat business secretary. At last, something they could agree on. "Fairness" suits Britain's coalition government so well not just because its meanings are all positive, but also because they are wide-ranging. To one lot of people, fairness means establishing the same rules for everybody, playing by them, and letting the best man win and the winner take all. To another, it means making sure that everybody gets equal shares. Those two meanings are not just different: they are opposite. They represent a choice that has to be made between freedom and equality. Yet so slippery-and thus convenient to politicians-is the English language that a single word encompasses both, and in doing so loses any claim to meaning.

单选题There is a difference between science and technology. Science is a method of answering (1) questions; technology is a method of solving practical problems. Science has to do with discovering the facts and relationships between (2) phenomena in nature and with establishing theories that (3) to organize these facts and relationships; technology has to do with tools, techniques, and (3) for applying the findings of science. Another (5) between science and technology has to do with the progress in each. Progress in science (6) the human factor. Scientists, who seek to understand the universe and know the truth within the highest degree of (7) and certainty, cannot (8) their own or other people's likes or dislikes or to popular ideas about the fitness of things. What scientists discover may shock or (9) people-as did Darwin's theory of evolution. But even an unpleasant truth is (10) than likely to be useful; besides, we have the choice of refusing to believe it! But (11) so with technology; we do not have the choice of refusing to hear the sound produced by a supersonic aircraft flying overhead; we cannot refuse to breathe polluted air. (12) science, progress in technology must be measured (13) the human factor. The purpose of technology is to serve people—people (14) , not merely some people; and future generations, not merely those who presently wish to (15) advantage for themselves. We are all familiar with the (16) use of technology. Many people blame technology itself (17) widespread pollution, resource depletion (枯竭) and even social decay in general—so much (18) the promise of technology is " (19) " That promise is a cleaner and healthier world. If wise applications of science and technology do not (20) a better world, what else will?

单选题Which of the following is most likely to be one of the "utilitarian political objectives" mentioned by the author?

单选题There are many features that (1) a movie as American, but perhaps the most (2) is the theme of the loner-hero (孤胆英雄). In the western movie, which comes out of many (3) of the American West, a typical figure is the lonesome cowboy. He wanders into a town and (4) out its troubles. Then the strong and independent hero rides off into the sunset (5) . Americans like this (6) in their films because they are (7) independent, and individualism (8) a great deal with them. An individual, who is able to (9) the evils of the world, or of a small town, is someone to admire. Even the gangster movie, a very popular (10) of the typical American film, usually has a hero. (11) he is a lawman out to catch the criminals or a gangster who suddenly sees the light and tries to go (12) During the violence-ridden period of Prohibition in the 1920s, the gangster movie (13) in popularity. These films kept the same. (14) as the western--the bad cannot triumph. One good person can save the innocent. Recent science fiction films deal (15) the same theme. Against the forces of the alien powers, people will fight to protect their ideals. Here, too, the action (16) around a single individual, (17) now he or she must save the world. The hero battles the unknown, trusting in inner capabilities and in the power of good (18) evil. Fearless, the hero of a typical American movie does not (19) to jump into the action. This dominant theme of the American movie is familiar (20) people around the world.

单选题As used in the fifth sentence of the fourth paragraph, the word "essentially" means ______.

单选题{{B}}Text 3{{/B}} When, in 1976. John Midgley was awarded the CBE for telling readers of The Economist about the United States, he took particular delight in the fact that he went by bus from work to accept the decoration from Queen Elizabeth (who was staying in Blair House in Washington), and was in and out quick enough, drinking up a gin and tonic without a stop, to use the transfer ticket to go out to dinner. He was a print hack all his life, spending freely on fun and friends, but never bothering to make his name known or his wallet fatter, with books or broadcasting. The possessor of free intelligence, he was not on a soap-box, or concentrated on influencing the great and good, though he got their attention just the same. His job, he once said, "was to assist the reading public to understand what was going on". He conveyed his liberal view of the world with great clarity but "if you can't give [people] useful information, you can shut up." He finally did shut up, just before Christmas. Midgley, born in the working-class north of England in 1911, was in military intelligence during the Second World War, trying to work out Germany's intentions. He then turned to journalism, dodging for a time between The Economist, the (then) Manchester Guardian and the Times. as leader writer and foreign correspondent. In 1956 he landed on The Economist and, luckily for us, stayed there, until and beyond his retirement, contributing a book review days before he died. He was foreign editor for seven years, pulling foreign coverage together in (his own words) "a reasonably satisfactory manner". He was a brilliant, scary teacher to a classroom of aspiring hacks, not lazily rewriting their pathetic stories but throwing them back to be redone, with advice that bums to this day. He also. less brilliantly, sent Kim Philby, whom he had known at Cambridge, to string for the paper from Beirut. until the spy's mask fell off and he fled to the Soviet Union. In 1963. after a bit of an upheaval at The Economist, he went off to be Washington correspondent and, from then on, everything fell into place. He excelled at his job, lucidly explaining American affairs even to Americans themselves as well as to the rest of the world. He married Elizabeth. a producer at CBS, and they looked after each other with love and wit. Their house in north-west Washington was a warm and lovely meeting-place. His was a good life, the second half especially.

单选题It was inevitable that any of President George W. Bush's fans had to be very disappointed by his decision to implement high tariffs on steel imported to the U. S. The president's defense was pathetic. He argued that the steel tariffs were somehow consistent with free trade, that the domestic industry was important and struggling t and that the relief was a temporary measure to allow time for restructuring. One reason that this argument is absurd is that U. S. integrated steel companies ("Big Steel") have received various forms of government protection and subsidy for more than 30 years. Instead of encouraging the industry to restructure, the long-term protection has sustained inefficient companies and cost U. S. consumers dearly. As Anne O. Krueger, now deputy managing director of the International Monetary Fund, said in a report on Big Steel: "The American Big Steel industry has been the champion lobbyist and seeker of protection... It provides a key and disillusioning example of the ability to lobby in Washington for measures which hurt the general public and help a very small group. Since 1950s, Big Steel has been reluctant to make the investments needed to match the new technologies introduced elsewhere. It agreed to high wages for its unionized labor force. Hence, the companies have difficulty in competing not only with more efficient producers in Asia and Europe but also with technologically advanced U.S. mini-mills, which rely on scrap metal as an input. Led by Nucor Cor. , these mills now capture about half of overall U. S. sales. The profitability of U. S. steel companies depends also on steel prices, which, despite attempts at protection by the U. S. and other governments, are determined primarily in world markets. These prices are relatively high as recently as early 2000 but have since declined with the world recession to reach the lowest dollar values of the last 20 years. Although these low prices are unfortunate for U.S. producers, they are beneficial for the overall U.S. economy. The low prices are also signal that the inefficient Big Steel companies should go out of business even faster than they have been. Instead of leaving or modernizing, the dying Big Steel industry complains that foreigners dump steels by selling at low prices. However, it is hard to see why it is bad for the overall U.S. economy if foreign producers wish to sell us their goods at low prices. After all, the extreme case of dumping is one where foreigners give us their steel for free and why would that be a bad thing?

单选题Not many 25-year-olds can reasonably claim to have changed the world. The IBM personal computer, which was launched in 1981 and celebrates its 25th birthday in August, is a rare exception. Other personal computers had been launched before; but it was the IBM PC that ended up defining the standard around which a vast new industry then coalesced. IBM, the titan of the computing World at the time, quickly lost control of its own creation, allowing others to reap the benefits. But leave aside what the PC has done for the fortunes of particular companies, and instead step back and consider what the PC has done for mankind. The PC's most obvious achievement has been to help make computers cheaper, more widely available and more useful than ever before. Before it appeared, different computers from different manufacturers were mostly incompatible with each other. The PC's architecture was not perfect, but its adoption as an industry standard made possible economies of scale in both hardware and software. This in turn reduced prices and enabled the PC to democratise computing. But although the PC has its merits, it also has its faults. Its flexibility has proved to be both a strength and a weakness: it encourages innovation, but at the cost of complexity, reliability and security. And for people in the developing world, PCs are too bulky, expensive and energy-hungry. W. hen it comes to extending the benefits of digital technology--chiefly, cheap and easy access to information to everyone on the planet, the PC may not be the best tool for the job. Look on the streets of almost any city in the world, however, and you will see people clutching tiny, pocket computers, better known as mobile phones. Already, even basic handsets have simple web-browsers, calculators and other computing functions. Mobile phones are cheaper, simpler and more reliable than PCs, and market forces--in particular, the combination of pie-paid billing plans and microcredit schemes--are already putting them into the hands of even the world's poorest people. Initiatives to spread PCs in the developing world, in contrast, rely on top-down funding from governments or aid agencies, rather than bottom-up adoption by consumers. All kinds of firms, from giants such as Google to start-ups such as CellBazaar, are working to bring the full belle, fits of the web to mobile phones. There is no question that the PC has democratised computing and-unleashed innovation, but it is the mobile phone that now seems most likely to carry the dream of the "personal computer" to its conclusion.