单选题CORNELL"S SUICIDE PROBLEM. That"s the description that broadcasted across the bottom of CNN during this morning"s segment about the university installing fences to prevent people from jumping into the gap. Actually, CNN, it"s not a suicide problem so much as a media problem—a problem stemming from outlets like yours that are quick to spread the myth that Cornell is the "suicide school". The New York Times is guilty, too. After the third Cornell suicide in less than a month, the Times ran a front-page story that said the university was on "high alert about the mental health of its students" and that the recent deaths "have cast a golly atmosphere over the university and renewed talk of Cornell"s reputation—unsup-ported, say officials—as a high-stress "suicide school"". But it"s not until deep into the jump, on April 25th, that the article addresses the actual statistics, which indicate that Cornell"s rate of suicides is no higher than the national average for a university of that size (about two a year). Other high-pressure colleges have more troubling numbers to contend with. MIT"s suicide rate since 1964, when the university started keeping track, is about 14.6 per 100,000 students, according to an article in MIT"s student newspaper, The Tech, compared to about 4.3 per 100,000 over the same time period at Cornell. And although the recent concentration of Cornell suicides is tragic and remarkable, it comes on the heels of four years without a single one. But the suicide-free years don"t make headlines; jumpers do. Granted, I"m a proud Cornell alumna, so I"m particularly sensitive about these misconceptions. But I like to think I"m relatively objective about my alma mater. Cornell suicides, when they occur, tend to be dramatic. They get national media attention with frightening images like the ones CNN was flashing today of guys in uniforms watching the campus bridges. The idea of a stressed-out undergraduate throwing himself into a deep gap—it"s frightening, and it stays with you. So much so that you probably remember it as more exaggerated a problem than it actually is. Individuals can"t be faulted for that—our brains do funny things with unreliable evidence. But media outlets are different, and should be found at fault when they fan these misconceptions.

单选题Among the farmers investigated, how many of them claimed to be suffering from organophosphate poisoning?______

单选题{{B}}Text 4{{/B}} A writer said yesterday that Richard M. Scrushy, the former chief executive of HealthS0uth, paid her through a public relations firm to produce several favorable articles for an Alabama newspaper that he reviewed before publication during his fraud trial last year. The articles appeared in The Birmingham Times, a black-owned weekly in Birmingham, Ale. Mr. Scrushy was acquitted in June in a six-month trial there on all 36 counts against him, despite testimony from former HealthSouth executives who said he presided over a huge accounting fraud. "I sat in that courtroom for six months, and I did everything possible to advocate for his cause," Audrey Lewis, the author of the articles, said in a telephone interview. She said she received $10.000 from Mr. Scrushy through the Lewis Group, a public relations firm, and another $1,000 to help buy a computer. "Scrushy promised me a lot more than what I got." she said. Charles A. Russell, a spokesman for Mr. Scrushy, said he was not aware of an explicit agreement for the Lewis Group to pay Ms. Lewis. The payments to Ms. Lewis were first reported by The Associated Press yesterday. "There's nothing there I think Richard would have any part of,"' Mr. Russell said. Mr. Russell said that Mr. Scrushy reviewed the articles before they were published. "Richard thought she was doing a little, 'F.Y.L, here's what I'm writing,'" Mr. Russell said. Ms. Lewis said that Mr. Russell, a prominent Denver-based crisis communications consultant, was also involved in providing her with financial compensation. She said Mr. Russell wrote her a $2.500 personal check at the end of May 2005; Mr. Russell said that was true. "She was looking for freelance community- relations work after the trial," Mr. Russell said. Ms. Lewis came into Mr. Scrushy's sphere through Believers Temple Church; she attends services and works as an administrator there. She and Rev. Herman Henderson, the pastor, were part of a group that appeared in court with Mr. Scrushy and often prayed with him during breaks. Before and during the trial, in which 11 of the 18 jurors were black. Mr. Scrushy, who is white, forged ties with Birmingham's African-American population. He joined a predominantly black church, and his foundation donated to it and other black congregations. Mr. Henderson also said he received payments from Mr. Scrushy in exchange for building support for him among blacks. Mr. Scrushy said in a statement yesterday that his foundation donated money to Mr. Henderson's church, but said the payments were unrelated to his case. "My foundation donated to his church building fund and to a Katrina relief effort that his church sponsored," Mr. Scrushy said. "That's it. Period." Ms. Lewis, 31, said she was disclosing details about the financial arrangement because Mr. Scrushy still owes her and Mr. Henderson a significant amount of money. Ms. Lewis provided copies of a retainer agreement that Mr. Scrushy signed last April with the Lewis Group, a public relations firm controlled by Jesse J. Lewis Sr., 82, the founder of The Birmingham Times, and a check issued to her in May from the Lewis Group. (Ms. Lewis and Mr. Lewis are not related.)

单选题Home-schoolers believe that

单选题It seems that the author is very critical of

单选题Who won the World Cup 1994 football game? What happened at the United Nations? How did the critics like the new play? (1) an event takes place, newspapers are on the streets (2) the details. Wherever anything happens in the world, reporters are on the spot to (3) the news. Newspapers have one basic (4) , to get the news as quickly as possible from its source, from those who make it to those who want to (5) it. Radio, telegraph, television, and (6) inventions brought competition for newspaper. So did the development of magazines and other means of communication. (7) , this competition merely spurred the newspapers on. They quickly made use of the newer and faster means of communication to improve the (8) and thus the efficiency of their own operations. Today more newspapers are (9) and read than ever before. Competition also led newspapers to branch out into many other fields. Besides keeping readers (10) of the latest news, today's newspapers (11) and influence readers about politics and other important and serious matters. Newspapers influence readers' economic choices (12) advertising. Most newspapers depend on advertising for very (13) . Newspapers are sold at a price that (14) even a small fraction of the cost of production. The main (15) of income for most newspapers is commercial advertising. The (16) in selling advertising depends on a newspaper's value to advertisers. This (17) in terms of circulation. How many people read the newspaper? Circulation depends (18) on the work of the circulation department and on the services or entertainment (19) in a newspaper's pages. But for the most part, circulation depends on a newspaper's value to readers as a source of information (20) the community, city, county, state, nation, and world—and even outer space.

单选题What Dr. Smith says in the third paragraph indicates that

单选题According to the passage, which of the following is Englishmen’s characteristic?

单选题{{B}}Part A{{/B}}{{B}}Directions:{{/B}} Reading the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1.{{B}}Text 1{{/B}} After the terrorist attacks in America last September, {{U}}terrorist risk became the pariah of perils{{/U}}. The airline industry was most directly affected by the attacks, and it was the first to find that no one wanted to insure terrorist risk. Insurance companies immediately increased premiums and cut cover for airlines' third-party terror and war liabilities to $ 50m per airline, per "event". Under pressure from airlines, the American government and the members of the European Union agreed to become insurers of last resort for airlines' war and terrorist liabilities, for a limited period. These government guarantees are due to expire at the end of the month. The American government has already agreed to extend its guarantee for another 60 days. The EU's transport ministers are meeting next week in Brussels to decide what to do. Insurers and reinsurers are keen for the commercial market to resume the provision of all airline insurance as soon as possible. No wonder: The premiums for such cover have inevitably increased considerably. However, in the case of terrorism, and especially of terrorism in the skies, a number of special factors arise. Some are purely practical: a disaster as sudden and unforeseen as the attacks on the World Trade Center has had destructive effects on the insurance industry. The maximum cover for third-party terrorist risk available in the primary aviation market is now $ 50m, and that is not nearly enough cover risks that are perceived to be much higher since September 11th. Even if the market could offer sufficient cover, another catastrophe on such a scale would be more than the market could cope with. In addition, a rare and devastating risk of a political nature is arguably one that it is right for governments to cover, at least in part. In the wake of attacks by Irish terrorists the British government has recognized this point by agreeing to back a mutual fund to cover risks to property from terrorist attack. In the case of the airlines, the appropriate answer is some form of mutual scheme with government backing. In fact, under the code-name "Equitime", representatives of airlines, insurers and the American government are setting up an insurance {{U}}vehicle{{/U}} to be financed by airlines and reinsured by the government. Governments would guarantee the fund's excess. risk, but their role would diminish as the fund grew. Setting something up will take time. So, to bridge the gap, governments will have to remain insurer of last resort for airlines' war and terrorist risk for some time to come.

单选题The author's positive attitude towards Milano's work is shown in

单选题It seems impossible to have an honest conversation about global warming. I say this after diligently perusing the British government's huge report released last week by Sir Nicholas Stern, former chief economist of the World Bank and now a high civil servant. The report is a masterpiece of misleading public relations. It foresees dire consequences if global warming isn't curbed: a worldwide depression and flooding of many coastal cities. Meanwhile, the costs of minimizing these awful outcomes are small: only 1 percent of world economic output in 2050. No sane person could fail to conclude that we should conquer global warming instantly, if not sooner. Who could disagree? Well, me. Stem's headlined conclusions are intellectual fictions. They're essentially fabrications to justify an aggressive anti-global-warming agenda. The danger of that is that we'd end up with the worst of both worlds: a program that harms the economy without much cutting of greenhouse gases. Let me throw some messy realities onto Stern's tidy picture. In the global-warming debate, there's a big gap between public rhetoric and public behavior. Greenhouse emissions continue to rise despite many earnest pledges to control them. Just last week, the United Nations reported that of the 41 countries it monitors (not including most developing nations), 34 had increased greenhouse emissions from 2000 to 2004. These include most countries committed to reducing emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. Why is this? In rich democracies, policies that might curb greenhouse gases require politicians and the public to act in exceptionally "enlightened" ways. They have to accept "pain" now for benefits that won't materialize for decades, probably after they're dead. And even if rich countries cut emissions, it won't make much difference unless poor countries do likewise and so far, they've refused because that might jeopardize their economic growth and poverty-reduction efforts. The notion that there's only a modest tension between suppressing greenhouse gases and sustaining economic growth is highly dubious. Stern arrives at his trivial costs—that 1 percent of world GDP in 2050—by essentially assuming them. His estimates presume that, with proper policies, technological improvements will automatically reconcile declining emissions with adequate economic growth. This is a heroic leap. To check warming, Stern wants annual emissions 25 percent below current levels by 2050. The IEA projects that economic growth by 2050 would more than double emissions. At present, we can't bridge that gap. The other great distortion in Stern's report involves global warming's effects. No one knows what these might be, because we don't know how much warming might occur, when, where, or how easily people might adapt. Stern's horrific specter distills many of the most terrifying guesses, including some imagined for the 22nd century, and implies they're imminent. The idea is to scare people while reassuring them that policies to avert calamity, if started now, would be fairly easy and inexpensive.

单选题Which of the following is TRUE about habits according to the text?

单选题The idea that boys and girls—and men and women—are programmed by evolution to behave differently from one another is now widely acknowledged. But which of the differences between the sexes are "biological", in the sense that they have been honed by evolution, and which are "cultural" or "environmental" and might more easily be altered by changed circumstances, is still fiercely debated. The sensitivity of the question was shown last year by an uproar at Harvard University. Larry Summers, then Harvard's president, caused a storm when he suggested that innate ability could be an important reason why there were so few women in the top positions in mathematics, engineering and the physical sciences. Even as a proposition for discussion, this is unacceptable to some. But biological explanations of human behavior are making a comeback. The success of neo -Darwinism has provided an intellectual foundation for discussion about why some differences between the sexes might be innate. And new scanning techniques have enabled researchers to examine the brain's interior while it is working, showing that male and female brains do, at one level, operate differently. The results, however, do not always support past cliches about what the differences in question actually are. One behavioral difference that has borne a huge amount of scrutiny is in mathematics, particularly since Dr. Summers' comments. The problem with trying to argue that the male tendency to systemize might lead to greater mathematical ability is that, in fact, girls and boys are equally good at maths prior to teenage years. Until recently, it was believed that males outperformed females in mathematics at all ages. Today, that picture has changed, and it appears that males and females of any age are equally good at computation and at understanding mathematical concepts. However, after their mid-teens, men are better at problem solving than women are. The question raised by Dr. Summers does get to the heart of the matter. Over the past 50 years, women have made huge progress into academia and within it. Slowly, they have worked their way into the higher echelons of discipline after discipline. But some parts of the ivory tower have proved harder to occupy than others, The question remains, to what degree is the absence of women in science, mathematics and engineering caused by innate, immutable ability? Innate it may well be. That does not mean it is immutable. A variety of abilities are amenable to training in both sexes. And such training works. Biology may predispose, but it is not necessarily destiny.

单选题{{B}}Part A{{/B}}{{B}}Directions:{{/B}}Reading the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1.{{B}}Text 1{{/B}} After the terrorist attacks in America last September, {{U}}terrorist risk became the pariah of perils.{{/U}} The airline industry was most directly affected by the attacks, and it was the first to find that no one wanted to insure terrorist risk. Insurance companies immediately increased premiums and cut cover for airlines' third-party terror and war liabilities to ＄ 50m per airline, per "event". Under pressure from airlines, the American government and the members of the European Union agreed to become insurers of last resort for airlines' war and terrorist liabilities, for a limited period. These government guarantees are due to expire at the end of the month. The American government has already agreed to extend its guarantee for another 60 days. The EU's transport ministers are meeting next week in Brussels to decide what to do. Insurers and reinsurers are keen for the commercial market to resume the provision of all airline insurance as soon as possible. No wonder: The premiums for such cover have inevitably increased considerably. However, in the case of terrorism, and especially of terrorism in the skies, a number of special factors arise. Some are purely practical: a disaster as sudden and unforeseen as the attacks on the World Trade Center has had destructive effects on the insurance industry. The maximum cover for third-party terrorist risk available in the primary aviation market is now $ 5Om, and that is not nearly enough cover risks that are perceived to be much higher since September 11th. Even if the market could offer sufficient cover, another catastrophe on such a scale would be more than the market could cope with. In addition, a rare and devastating risk of a political nature is arguably one that it is right for governments to cover, at least in part. In the wake of attacks by Irish terrorists the British government has recognized this point by agreeing to back a mutual fund to cover risks to property from terrorist attack. In the case of the airlines, the appropriate answer is some form of mutual scheme with government backing. In fact, under the code-name "Equitime", representatives of airlines, insurers and the American government are setting up an insurance {{U}}vehicle{{/U}} to be financed by airlines and reinsured by the government. Governments would guarantee the fund's excess risk, but their role would diminish as the fund grew. Setting something up will take time. So, to bridge the gap, governments will have to remain insurer of last resort for airlines' war and terrorist risk for some time to come.

单选题{{B}}Text 4{{/B}} The Republican Party has lost its mind. To win elections, a party needs votes, obviously, and constituencies. First, however, it needs ideas. In 1994--95, the Republican Party had after long struggle advanced a coherent, compelling set of political ideas expressed in a specific legislative agenda. The political story of 1996 is that this same party, within the space of six weeks, then became totally, shockingly intellectually {{U}}deranged{{/U}}. Then, astonishingly, on the very moment of their philosophical victory, just as the Republicans prepared to carry these ideas into battle in November, came cannon fire from the rear. Pat Buchanan first came out to declare a general insurrection. The enemy, according to Buchanan, is not the welfare state. It is that conservative icon, capitalism, with its ruthless captains of industry, greedy financiers and political elites (Republicans included, of course). All three groups collaborate to let foreigners--immigrants, traders, parasitic foreign-aid loafers--destroy the good life of the ordinary American worker. Buchananism would support and wield a big and mighty government apparatus to protect the little guy from buffeting, a government that builds trade walls and immigrant-repelling fences, that imposes punitive taxes on imports, and that polices the hiring and firing practices of business with the arrogance of the most zealous forcer. Republicans have focused too much on the mere tactical dangers posed by this assault. Yes, it gives ammunition to the Democrats. Yes, it puts the eventual nominee through a bruising campaign and delivers him tarnished and drained into the ring against Bill Clinton. But the real danger is philosophical, not tactical. It is axioms, not just policies, that are under fire. The Republican idea of smaller government is being ground to dust--by Republicans. In the middle of an election year, when they should be honing their themes against Democratic liberalism, Buehanan's rise is forcing a pointless rearguard battle against a philosophical corpse, the obsolete paleoconservatism--a mix of nativism, protectionism and isolationism--of the 1930s. As the candidates' debate in Arizona last week showed, the entire primary campaign will be fought on Buchanan's grounds, fending off his Smoot-Hawley-Franco populism. And then what? After the convention, what does the nominee do? Try to resurrect the anti-welfare state themes of the historically successful '94 congressional campaign? Political parties can survive bruising primary battles. They cannot survive ideological meltdown. Dole and Buchanan say they are fighting for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. Heart and soul, however, will get you nowhere when you've lost your way--and your mind.

单选题The author considers a new theory that coherently relates diverse phenomena to one another to be the______