Part Two
Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn't know for sure? That the evidence was inconclusive, the science uncertain? That the antismoking lobby was out to destroy our way of life and the government should stay out of the way? Lots of Americans bought that nonsense, and over three decades, some 10 million smokers went to early graves.
There are upsetting parallels today, as scientists in one wave after another try to awaken us to the growing threat of global warming. The latest was a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, enlisted by the White House, to tell us that Earth's atmosphere is definitely warming and that the problem is largely man-made. The clear message is that we should get moving to protect ourselves. The president of the National Academy, Bruce Alberts, added this key point in the preface to the panel's report: "Science never has all the answer. But science does provide us with the best available guide to the future, and it is critical that our nation and the world base important policies on the best judgments that science can provide concerning the future consequences of present actions."
Just as on smoking, voice now come from many quarters insisting that the science about global warming is incomplete, that it's OK to keep pouring fumes into the air until we know for sure. This is a dangerous game: by the time 100 percent people of the evidence is in, it may be too late. With the risks obvious and growing, a prudent people would take out an insurance policy now.
Fortunately, the White House is starting to pay attention. But it's obvious that a majority of the president's advisers still don't take global warming seriously. Instead of a plan of action, they continue to press for more research — a classic case of "paralysis by analysis."
To serve as responsible stewards of the planet, we must press forward on deeper atmospheric and oceanic research. But research alone is inadequate. If the Administration won't take the legislative initiative, Congress should help to begin fashioning conservation measures. A bill by Democratic Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, which would offer financial incentives for private industry, is a promising start. Many see that the country is getting ready to build lots of new power plants to meet our energy needs. If we are ever going to protect the atmosphere, it is crucial that those new plants be environmentally sound.
6. An argument made by supporters of smoking was that.
[A] there was no scientific evidence of the correlation between smoking and death.
[B] the number of early deaths of smokers in the past decades was insignificant
[C] people had the freedom to choose their own way of life
[D] antismoking people were usually talking nonsense
7. According to Bruce Alberts, science can serve as
[A] a protector. [B] a judge [C] a critic [D] a guide
8. What does the author mean by "paralysis by analysis" （Last line, Paragraph 4）?
[A] Endless studies kill action. [B] Careful investigation reveals truth
[C] Prudent planning hinders progress [D] Extensive research helps decision-making
9. According to the author, what should the Administration do about global warming?
[A] Offer aid to build cleaner power plants [B] Raise public awareness of conservation
[C] Press for further scientific research [D] Take some legislative measures
0. The author associates the issue of global warming with that of smoking because
[A] they both suffered from the government's negligence.
[B] a lesson from the latter is applicable to the former.
[C] the outcome of the latter aggravates the former.
[D] both of them have turned from bad to worse.
Unit12（2005） Part 2
重點(diǎn)詞匯：
1. inconclusive ???（非結(jié)論性的，不確定的） 即in+con一起+clus=close,shut關(guān)閉+ive。 Inconclusive evidence 無效的證據(jù)
2. lobby ??。ㄩT廳，接待室；向[議員等]進(jìn)行游說[或疏通]） the antinuclear lobby are becoming stronger.向議員游說的反核群眾聲勢漸漲parallel ?? （類似的事物，平行線）para并排。 A parallel circuit 并聯(lián)電路 There are curious parallels between medicine and low.醫(yī)學(xué)和法律之間有著奇特的相似之處
3. pour ? （傾瀉，涌出；倒） Summerpours warm sunlight into the valley.夏日炙熱的陽光瀉進(jìn)山谷 peports of new successs keep pouring.捷報(bào)頻傳 It never rains but its pours. 不下則以，一下就大雨傾盆。[喻]禍不單行。
4. prudent ??（審慎的，謹(jǐn)慎的）即p不+rude粗魯?shù)?ent形容詞后綴→不粗即細(xì)也。be modest and prudent 謙虛謹(jǐn)慎 the prudent us of resources 資源的節(jié)約使用 反義詞：imprudent paralysis ???（癱瘓）para=beside,alongside旁，側(cè)。infantile paralysis 小兒麻痹癥 a paralysis of trade 貿(mào)易停頓參見2003年Text 2。
5. Steward （管家，管事；服務(wù)員，乘務(wù)員） an air stewardess 空中小姐
6. legislative ??（立法的） 看作leg詞根“法律”（參allegation宣稱，2003年Text 2）+is是+lat（e） 遲的+ion名詞后綴→法律是遲的→所以要不斷“立法”與事俱進(jìn)哦 ? 。 Legislative reform is long overdue. 立法方面的改革早該進(jìn)行。
7. initiative ?（主動(dòng)的行動(dòng)，首創(chuàng)精神）an initiative proposal 初步提議 a man who lacks the initiative to be a leader. 缺乏當(dāng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人應(yīng)具備的主動(dòng)精神 It’s up to this country to take the initiative in banning nuclear weapons. 這個(gè)國家應(yīng)該主動(dòng)提出禁止核武器
8. crucial （至關(guān)重要的，決定性的）
難句解析：
① Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn't know for sure? That the evidence was inconclusive, the science uncertain? That the antismoking lobby was out to destroy our way of life and the government should stay out of the way?
這里有三個(gè)問句，第一個(gè)問句的主干是Do you remember all those years…,后面的when引導(dǎo)的定語從句修飾前面的名詞years,定語從句由but連接的兩個(gè)句子組成;的二個(gè)問句和第三個(gè)問句各自句首的that都引導(dǎo)一個(gè)賓語從句，都承第一個(gè)問句省略了主句Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted…;the science uncertain 承前省略了was。
通過結(jié)構(gòu)分析我們知道這幾個(gè)句子都是圍繞第一個(gè)問句的主干部分展開的并列疑問句，因此我們則在閱讀中應(yīng)弄清楚句子的層次，逐一分析。
② The latest was a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, enlisted by the White House, to tell us that the Earth's atmosphere is definitely warming and that the problem is largely man-made.
本句的主干是The latest was a panel from the National Academy of Sciences…，過去分詞短語enlisted by the White Hourse作后置定語，修飾前面的名詞panel；不定式短語to tell us that…也做名詞panel的定語，其中tell后面接兩個(gè)以that引導(dǎo)的并列賓語從句。
③ But science does provide us with the best available guide to the future, and it is critical that out nation and the world base important policies on the best judgments that science can provide concerning the future consequences of present actions.”
本句包含and連接的兩個(gè)并列分句，其中第一個(gè)分句中的does表示強(qiáng)調(diào)；第二個(gè)分句中的it是形式主語，critical后面引導(dǎo)的從句是真正的主語；在主語從句中，judgment后面的介詞結(jié)構(gòu)concerning…也修飾judgments,作定語。
④ Just as on smoking, voices now come from many quarters insisting that the science about global warming is incomplete, that it's Ok to keep pouring fumes into the air until we know for sure。
本句的主干是voices now come from many quarters…；現(xiàn)在分詞短語insisting… 作伴隨狀語，insiting后面接了兩個(gè)以that引導(dǎo)的賓語從句，其中第二個(gè)賓語從句還包含以until引導(dǎo)的時(shí)間狀語從句。
⑤ Instead of a plan of action, they continue to press for more research-a classic case of “paralysis by analysis”.
Instead of 表示否定；破折號后面的部分不是修飾前面的名詞research,而是說明前面的整個(gè)句子。Paralysis analysis 的意思是“研究導(dǎo)致癱瘓”，就是無休止的研究一件事，致使最終沒有任何行動(dòng)。
試題解析：
這是一篇選自Newsweek的關(guān)于環(huán)保的時(shí)事類文章， 也是運(yùn)用了類比的寫作手法，作者講抽煙的目的是為了說明現(xiàn)在的溫室效應(yīng)：許多人抽煙沒有人去管，因?yàn)槿狈ψ銐虻淖C據(jù),咱們各國政府也不管溫室效應(yīng), 也是同樣的原因。文章中心講述世界各個(gè)政府對溫室效應(yīng)的解決的態(tài)度，篇章的圍繞“證據(jù)不足”、“科學(xué)意義”、“制定法律”這樣三個(gè)關(guān)鍵詞展開。
6. 【正確答案】[C]
這是一道細(xì)節(jié)題 。題干問：“支持吸煙的人所做的辯論是 ……”。 依據(jù)第一段第三句,作者提出了支持吸煙者的各種論調(diào)。在論調(diào)之中有選項(xiàng)［C］“人們有選擇自己的生活方式的自由”的思想。選項(xiàng)［A］“沒有科學(xué)證據(jù)證明吸煙與死亡之間的因果關(guān)系”太絕對化。選項(xiàng)［B］“在過去幾十年里吸煙者早死的人數(shù)不多”，和選項(xiàng)［D］“反對吸煙的人們總是講些無聊的話”，兩個(gè)選項(xiàng)是原文片語表達(dá)斷章取義的表述，并不吻合與原文的信息。
7. 【正確答案】 [D]
這是一道細(xì)節(jié)題，問：在Alberts看來，科學(xué)可以用作（serve as）什么？依據(jù)第二段末“But science does provide us with the best available guide to the future”可知答案為D（指導(dǎo)）。B干擾很強(qiáng)，但文章只是說科學(xué)可以為決策提供判斷依據(jù)，而不是說科學(xué)可以用作為a judge（法官，裁判）。選項(xiàng)［A］“保護(hù)者”、選項(xiàng)［Ｃ］“批判家”代入原文無法構(gòu)成意義和邏輯上的一致性和連貫性。
8. 【正確答案】 [A]
這是一道詞義題。題干問：“作者在第四自然段最后一行所使用的”paralysis by analysis“含義是什么？” 本題考察的仍然是句群含義的歸納能力。解讀原文可以看出作者在第3、4兩個(gè)自然段之間探討的是繼續(xù)研究還是馬上行動(dòng)的問題。根據(jù)篇章的一致性，該表達(dá)的最可能含義是選項(xiàng)［A］“無休止研究耽誤了行動(dòng)”的內(nèi)容。［B］選項(xiàng)“仔細(xì)的調(diào)查反映出了事實(shí)”，選項(xiàng)［Ｃ］“謹(jǐn)慎的計(jì)劃阻礙了進(jìn)步”和選項(xiàng)［D］“廣泛的研究幫助制定決策”，其實(shí)三個(gè)錯(cuò)誤選項(xiàng)是原文片語表達(dá)斷章取義的表述。
9. 【正確答案】 [D]
本題是一道作者觀點(diǎn)態(tài)度題。題干問：“根據(jù)作者，關(guān)于全球變暖政府應(yīng)該做些什么？” 注意題干詢問的是政府應(yīng)該采取的措施。本題可以定位在最后一個(gè)自然段。分析原文可知，作者反復(fù)強(qiáng)調(diào)“l(fā)egislative”，“bill”等概念。政府應(yīng)該做的是“采取立法措施”，即選項(xiàng)［D］的內(nèi)容。其實(shí)就政府的措施問題在上文就已經(jīng)有所暗示，如政府的“policies”等概念。［A］選項(xiàng)“提供援助建立更干凈的發(fā)電廠”和選項(xiàng)［B］“引起公眾的環(huán)保意識”為原文片語表達(dá)斷章取義的表述。而選項(xiàng)［Ｃ］“加強(qiáng)進(jìn)一步的科學(xué)研究”是作者反對的觀點(diǎn)。
10. 【正確答案】[B]
本題涉及第一段與文章主題之間的語義關(guān)系。作者第一段說吸煙的危害以及人們的漠然，無非是說明情況也存在于溫室效應(yīng)問題（第二段開頭），所以［B］“后者（吸煙）的教訓(xùn)也適用于前者（溫室）”為正確答案?？忌?xì)心理解選項(xiàng)的意思，再對比原文的含義。［A］選項(xiàng)“兩者都受到了政府的忽略”錯(cuò)誤，根據(jù)原文政府忽略的是前者。選項(xiàng)［Ｃ］“后者的結(jié)果加重了前者”沒有必然的關(guān)系。選項(xiàng)［D］“兩者都從壞變得更壞”不是作者談?wù)撨@兩個(gè)話題的主要目的。
全文翻譯：
還記得科學(xué)家們認(rèn)為吸煙會(huì)致人死亡，而那些懷疑者們卻堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為我們無法對此得出定論的時(shí)候嗎？還記得懷疑者們堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為缺乏決定性的證據(jù)，科學(xué)也不確定的時(shí)候嗎？還記得懷疑者們堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為反對吸煙的游說是為了毀掉我們的生活方式，而政府應(yīng)該置身事外的時(shí)候嗎？許多美國人相信了這些胡言亂語，在三十多年中，差不多有一千萬煙民早早的進(jìn)了墳?zāi)埂?BR> 現(xiàn)在出現(xiàn)了與吸煙類似的令人感到難過的事情?？茖W(xué)家們前仆后繼，試圖使我們意識到全球氣候變暖所帶來的日益嚴(yán)重的威脅。最近的行動(dòng)是由白宮召集了一批來自國家科學(xué)院的專家團(tuán)，他們告訴我們，地球氣候毫無疑問正在變暖，而這個(gè)問題主要是人為造成的。明確的信息表明是我們應(yīng)該立刻著手保護(hù)自己。國家科學(xué)院院長Bruce Alberts在專家團(tuán)報(bào)告的前言中加上了這一重要觀點(diǎn)：“科學(xué)解答不了所有問題。但是科學(xué)確實(shí)為我們的未來提供了的指導(dǎo)，關(guān)鍵是我們的國家和整個(gè)的世界在做重要決策時(shí)，應(yīng)該以科學(xué)能夠提供的關(guān)于人類現(xiàn)在的行為對未來影響的判斷作為依據(jù)。
就象吸煙問題一樣，來自不同領(lǐng)域的聲音堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為有關(guān)全球變暖的科學(xué)資料還不完整。在我們證實(shí)這件事之前可以向大氣中不斷的排放氣體。這是一個(gè)危險(xiǎn)的游戲；到了有的證據(jù)的時(shí)候，可能就太晚了。隨著風(fēng)險(xiǎn)越來越明顯，并且不斷增加，一個(gè)謹(jǐn)慎的民族現(xiàn)在應(yīng)該準(zhǔn)備一份保單了。
幸運(yùn)的是，白宮開始關(guān)注這件事了。但是顯然大多數(shù)總統(tǒng)顧問并沒有認(rèn)真看待全球氣候變暖這個(gè)問題。他們沒有出臺(tái)行動(dòng)計(jì)劃，相反只是繼續(xù)迫切要求進(jìn)行更多的研究――這是一個(gè)經(jīng)典的“分析導(dǎo)致麻痹案例”。
為了成為地球上有責(zé)任心的一員，我們必須積極推進(jìn)對于大氣和海洋的深入研究。但只有研究是不夠的。如果政府不爭取立法上的主動(dòng)權(quán)，國會(huì)就應(yīng)該幫助政府開始采取保護(hù)措施。弗吉尼亞的民主黨議員Robert Byrd提出一項(xiàng)議案，從經(jīng)濟(jì)上激勵(lì)私企，就是一個(gè)良好的開端。許多人看到這個(gè)國家正準(zhǔn)備修建許多新的發(fā)電廠，以滿足我們的能源需求。如果我們準(zhǔn)備保護(hù)大氣，關(guān)鍵要讓這些新發(fā)電廠對環(huán)境無害。
Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn't know for sure? That the evidence was inconclusive, the science uncertain? That the antismoking lobby was out to destroy our way of life and the government should stay out of the way? Lots of Americans bought that nonsense, and over three decades, some 10 million smokers went to early graves.
There are upsetting parallels today, as scientists in one wave after another try to awaken us to the growing threat of global warming. The latest was a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, enlisted by the White House, to tell us that Earth's atmosphere is definitely warming and that the problem is largely man-made. The clear message is that we should get moving to protect ourselves. The president of the National Academy, Bruce Alberts, added this key point in the preface to the panel's report: "Science never has all the answer. But science does provide us with the best available guide to the future, and it is critical that our nation and the world base important policies on the best judgments that science can provide concerning the future consequences of present actions."
Just as on smoking, voice now come from many quarters insisting that the science about global warming is incomplete, that it's OK to keep pouring fumes into the air until we know for sure. This is a dangerous game: by the time 100 percent people of the evidence is in, it may be too late. With the risks obvious and growing, a prudent people would take out an insurance policy now.
Fortunately, the White House is starting to pay attention. But it's obvious that a majority of the president's advisers still don't take global warming seriously. Instead of a plan of action, they continue to press for more research — a classic case of "paralysis by analysis."
To serve as responsible stewards of the planet, we must press forward on deeper atmospheric and oceanic research. But research alone is inadequate. If the Administration won't take the legislative initiative, Congress should help to begin fashioning conservation measures. A bill by Democratic Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, which would offer financial incentives for private industry, is a promising start. Many see that the country is getting ready to build lots of new power plants to meet our energy needs. If we are ever going to protect the atmosphere, it is crucial that those new plants be environmentally sound.
6. An argument made by supporters of smoking was that.
[A] there was no scientific evidence of the correlation between smoking and death.
[B] the number of early deaths of smokers in the past decades was insignificant
[C] people had the freedom to choose their own way of life
[D] antismoking people were usually talking nonsense
7. According to Bruce Alberts, science can serve as
[A] a protector. [B] a judge [C] a critic [D] a guide
8. What does the author mean by "paralysis by analysis" （Last line, Paragraph 4）?
[A] Endless studies kill action. [B] Careful investigation reveals truth
[C] Prudent planning hinders progress [D] Extensive research helps decision-making
9. According to the author, what should the Administration do about global warming?
[A] Offer aid to build cleaner power plants [B] Raise public awareness of conservation
[C] Press for further scientific research [D] Take some legislative measures
0. The author associates the issue of global warming with that of smoking because
[A] they both suffered from the government's negligence.
[B] a lesson from the latter is applicable to the former.
[C] the outcome of the latter aggravates the former.
[D] both of them have turned from bad to worse.
Unit12（2005） Part 2
重點(diǎn)詞匯：
1. inconclusive ???（非結(jié)論性的，不確定的） 即in+con一起+clus=close,shut關(guān)閉+ive。 Inconclusive evidence 無效的證據(jù)
2. lobby ??。ㄩT廳，接待室；向[議員等]進(jìn)行游說[或疏通]） the antinuclear lobby are becoming stronger.向議員游說的反核群眾聲勢漸漲parallel ?? （類似的事物，平行線）para并排。 A parallel circuit 并聯(lián)電路 There are curious parallels between medicine and low.醫(yī)學(xué)和法律之間有著奇特的相似之處
3. pour ? （傾瀉，涌出；倒） Summerpours warm sunlight into the valley.夏日炙熱的陽光瀉進(jìn)山谷 peports of new successs keep pouring.捷報(bào)頻傳 It never rains but its pours. 不下則以，一下就大雨傾盆。[喻]禍不單行。
4. prudent ??（審慎的，謹(jǐn)慎的）即p不+rude粗魯?shù)?ent形容詞后綴→不粗即細(xì)也。be modest and prudent 謙虛謹(jǐn)慎 the prudent us of resources 資源的節(jié)約使用 反義詞：imprudent paralysis ???（癱瘓）para=beside,alongside旁，側(cè)。infantile paralysis 小兒麻痹癥 a paralysis of trade 貿(mào)易停頓參見2003年Text 2。
5. Steward （管家，管事；服務(wù)員，乘務(wù)員） an air stewardess 空中小姐
6. legislative ??（立法的） 看作leg詞根“法律”（參allegation宣稱，2003年Text 2）+is是+lat（e） 遲的+ion名詞后綴→法律是遲的→所以要不斷“立法”與事俱進(jìn)哦 ? 。 Legislative reform is long overdue. 立法方面的改革早該進(jìn)行。
7. initiative ?（主動(dòng)的行動(dòng)，首創(chuàng)精神）an initiative proposal 初步提議 a man who lacks the initiative to be a leader. 缺乏當(dāng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人應(yīng)具備的主動(dòng)精神 It’s up to this country to take the initiative in banning nuclear weapons. 這個(gè)國家應(yīng)該主動(dòng)提出禁止核武器
8. crucial （至關(guān)重要的，決定性的）
難句解析：
① Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn't know for sure? That the evidence was inconclusive, the science uncertain? That the antismoking lobby was out to destroy our way of life and the government should stay out of the way?
這里有三個(gè)問句，第一個(gè)問句的主干是Do you remember all those years…,后面的when引導(dǎo)的定語從句修飾前面的名詞years,定語從句由but連接的兩個(gè)句子組成;的二個(gè)問句和第三個(gè)問句各自句首的that都引導(dǎo)一個(gè)賓語從句，都承第一個(gè)問句省略了主句Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted…;the science uncertain 承前省略了was。
通過結(jié)構(gòu)分析我們知道這幾個(gè)句子都是圍繞第一個(gè)問句的主干部分展開的并列疑問句，因此我們則在閱讀中應(yīng)弄清楚句子的層次，逐一分析。
② The latest was a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, enlisted by the White House, to tell us that the Earth's atmosphere is definitely warming and that the problem is largely man-made.
本句的主干是The latest was a panel from the National Academy of Sciences…，過去分詞短語enlisted by the White Hourse作后置定語，修飾前面的名詞panel；不定式短語to tell us that…也做名詞panel的定語，其中tell后面接兩個(gè)以that引導(dǎo)的并列賓語從句。
③ But science does provide us with the best available guide to the future, and it is critical that out nation and the world base important policies on the best judgments that science can provide concerning the future consequences of present actions.”
本句包含and連接的兩個(gè)并列分句，其中第一個(gè)分句中的does表示強(qiáng)調(diào)；第二個(gè)分句中的it是形式主語，critical后面引導(dǎo)的從句是真正的主語；在主語從句中，judgment后面的介詞結(jié)構(gòu)concerning…也修飾judgments,作定語。
④ Just as on smoking, voices now come from many quarters insisting that the science about global warming is incomplete, that it's Ok to keep pouring fumes into the air until we know for sure。
本句的主干是voices now come from many quarters…；現(xiàn)在分詞短語insisting… 作伴隨狀語，insiting后面接了兩個(gè)以that引導(dǎo)的賓語從句，其中第二個(gè)賓語從句還包含以until引導(dǎo)的時(shí)間狀語從句。
⑤ Instead of a plan of action, they continue to press for more research-a classic case of “paralysis by analysis”.
Instead of 表示否定；破折號后面的部分不是修飾前面的名詞research,而是說明前面的整個(gè)句子。Paralysis analysis 的意思是“研究導(dǎo)致癱瘓”，就是無休止的研究一件事，致使最終沒有任何行動(dòng)。
試題解析：
這是一篇選自Newsweek的關(guān)于環(huán)保的時(shí)事類文章， 也是運(yùn)用了類比的寫作手法，作者講抽煙的目的是為了說明現(xiàn)在的溫室效應(yīng)：許多人抽煙沒有人去管，因?yàn)槿狈ψ銐虻淖C據(jù),咱們各國政府也不管溫室效應(yīng), 也是同樣的原因。文章中心講述世界各個(gè)政府對溫室效應(yīng)的解決的態(tài)度，篇章的圍繞“證據(jù)不足”、“科學(xué)意義”、“制定法律”這樣三個(gè)關(guān)鍵詞展開。
6. 【正確答案】[C]
這是一道細(xì)節(jié)題 。題干問：“支持吸煙的人所做的辯論是 ……”。 依據(jù)第一段第三句,作者提出了支持吸煙者的各種論調(diào)。在論調(diào)之中有選項(xiàng)［C］“人們有選擇自己的生活方式的自由”的思想。選項(xiàng)［A］“沒有科學(xué)證據(jù)證明吸煙與死亡之間的因果關(guān)系”太絕對化。選項(xiàng)［B］“在過去幾十年里吸煙者早死的人數(shù)不多”，和選項(xiàng)［D］“反對吸煙的人們總是講些無聊的話”，兩個(gè)選項(xiàng)是原文片語表達(dá)斷章取義的表述，并不吻合與原文的信息。
7. 【正確答案】 [D]
這是一道細(xì)節(jié)題，問：在Alberts看來，科學(xué)可以用作（serve as）什么？依據(jù)第二段末“But science does provide us with the best available guide to the future”可知答案為D（指導(dǎo)）。B干擾很強(qiáng)，但文章只是說科學(xué)可以為決策提供判斷依據(jù)，而不是說科學(xué)可以用作為a judge（法官，裁判）。選項(xiàng)［A］“保護(hù)者”、選項(xiàng)［Ｃ］“批判家”代入原文無法構(gòu)成意義和邏輯上的一致性和連貫性。
8. 【正確答案】 [A]
這是一道詞義題。題干問：“作者在第四自然段最后一行所使用的”paralysis by analysis“含義是什么？” 本題考察的仍然是句群含義的歸納能力。解讀原文可以看出作者在第3、4兩個(gè)自然段之間探討的是繼續(xù)研究還是馬上行動(dòng)的問題。根據(jù)篇章的一致性，該表達(dá)的最可能含義是選項(xiàng)［A］“無休止研究耽誤了行動(dòng)”的內(nèi)容。［B］選項(xiàng)“仔細(xì)的調(diào)查反映出了事實(shí)”，選項(xiàng)［Ｃ］“謹(jǐn)慎的計(jì)劃阻礙了進(jìn)步”和選項(xiàng)［D］“廣泛的研究幫助制定決策”，其實(shí)三個(gè)錯(cuò)誤選項(xiàng)是原文片語表達(dá)斷章取義的表述。
9. 【正確答案】 [D]
本題是一道作者觀點(diǎn)態(tài)度題。題干問：“根據(jù)作者，關(guān)于全球變暖政府應(yīng)該做些什么？” 注意題干詢問的是政府應(yīng)該采取的措施。本題可以定位在最后一個(gè)自然段。分析原文可知，作者反復(fù)強(qiáng)調(diào)“l(fā)egislative”，“bill”等概念。政府應(yīng)該做的是“采取立法措施”，即選項(xiàng)［D］的內(nèi)容。其實(shí)就政府的措施問題在上文就已經(jīng)有所暗示，如政府的“policies”等概念。［A］選項(xiàng)“提供援助建立更干凈的發(fā)電廠”和選項(xiàng)［B］“引起公眾的環(huán)保意識”為原文片語表達(dá)斷章取義的表述。而選項(xiàng)［Ｃ］“加強(qiáng)進(jìn)一步的科學(xué)研究”是作者反對的觀點(diǎn)。
10. 【正確答案】[B]
本題涉及第一段與文章主題之間的語義關(guān)系。作者第一段說吸煙的危害以及人們的漠然，無非是說明情況也存在于溫室效應(yīng)問題（第二段開頭），所以［B］“后者（吸煙）的教訓(xùn)也適用于前者（溫室）”為正確答案?？忌?xì)心理解選項(xiàng)的意思，再對比原文的含義。［A］選項(xiàng)“兩者都受到了政府的忽略”錯(cuò)誤，根據(jù)原文政府忽略的是前者。選項(xiàng)［Ｃ］“后者的結(jié)果加重了前者”沒有必然的關(guān)系。選項(xiàng)［D］“兩者都從壞變得更壞”不是作者談?wù)撨@兩個(gè)話題的主要目的。
全文翻譯：
還記得科學(xué)家們認(rèn)為吸煙會(huì)致人死亡，而那些懷疑者們卻堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為我們無法對此得出定論的時(shí)候嗎？還記得懷疑者們堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為缺乏決定性的證據(jù)，科學(xué)也不確定的時(shí)候嗎？還記得懷疑者們堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為反對吸煙的游說是為了毀掉我們的生活方式，而政府應(yīng)該置身事外的時(shí)候嗎？許多美國人相信了這些胡言亂語，在三十多年中，差不多有一千萬煙民早早的進(jìn)了墳?zāi)埂?BR> 現(xiàn)在出現(xiàn)了與吸煙類似的令人感到難過的事情?？茖W(xué)家們前仆后繼，試圖使我們意識到全球氣候變暖所帶來的日益嚴(yán)重的威脅。最近的行動(dòng)是由白宮召集了一批來自國家科學(xué)院的專家團(tuán)，他們告訴我們，地球氣候毫無疑問正在變暖，而這個(gè)問題主要是人為造成的。明確的信息表明是我們應(yīng)該立刻著手保護(hù)自己。國家科學(xué)院院長Bruce Alberts在專家團(tuán)報(bào)告的前言中加上了這一重要觀點(diǎn)：“科學(xué)解答不了所有問題。但是科學(xué)確實(shí)為我們的未來提供了的指導(dǎo)，關(guān)鍵是我們的國家和整個(gè)的世界在做重要決策時(shí)，應(yīng)該以科學(xué)能夠提供的關(guān)于人類現(xiàn)在的行為對未來影響的判斷作為依據(jù)。
就象吸煙問題一樣，來自不同領(lǐng)域的聲音堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為有關(guān)全球變暖的科學(xué)資料還不完整。在我們證實(shí)這件事之前可以向大氣中不斷的排放氣體。這是一個(gè)危險(xiǎn)的游戲；到了有的證據(jù)的時(shí)候，可能就太晚了。隨著風(fēng)險(xiǎn)越來越明顯，并且不斷增加，一個(gè)謹(jǐn)慎的民族現(xiàn)在應(yīng)該準(zhǔn)備一份保單了。
幸運(yùn)的是，白宮開始關(guān)注這件事了。但是顯然大多數(shù)總統(tǒng)顧問并沒有認(rèn)真看待全球氣候變暖這個(gè)問題。他們沒有出臺(tái)行動(dòng)計(jì)劃，相反只是繼續(xù)迫切要求進(jìn)行更多的研究――這是一個(gè)經(jīng)典的“分析導(dǎo)致麻痹案例”。
為了成為地球上有責(zé)任心的一員，我們必須積極推進(jìn)對于大氣和海洋的深入研究。但只有研究是不夠的。如果政府不爭取立法上的主動(dòng)權(quán)，國會(huì)就應(yīng)該幫助政府開始采取保護(hù)措施。弗吉尼亞的民主黨議員Robert Byrd提出一項(xiàng)議案，從經(jīng)濟(jì)上激勵(lì)私企，就是一個(gè)良好的開端。許多人看到這個(gè)國家正準(zhǔn)備修建許多新的發(fā)電廠，以滿足我們的能源需求。如果我們準(zhǔn)備保護(hù)大氣，關(guān)鍵要讓這些新發(fā)電廠對環(huán)境無害。