★英語聽力頻道為大家整理的托福TPO：TPO-17 Lecture 2 環(huán)境科學(xué) 。更多閱讀請查看本站英語聽力頻道。
However, in the late 1980s, some scientists were exploring Devil's Hole, which is basically an extensive water-filled cave, far from the ocean, in Nevada, in the western United States. Over millions of years, groundwater left deposits of a mineral called calcite, on the rock within Devil's Hole. And by studying these calcite deposits, we can determine the climate conditions, the temperatures over the last half million years. Well, the Devil's Hole findings contradicted the ones obtained during the 1970s, so basically the question was, were the ages of one or both the samples were wrong, or were scientists misunderstanding the significance of the evidence. Well, in the 1990s, a new study was done on the two samples. And the ocean floor samples were found to be correct, as were the samples from Devil's Hole. And now it's generally believed that the samples from Devil's Hole correspond to variations in local climate, in the western United States, rather than global climate changes.
然而，在 20 世紀(jì) 80 年代后期，一些科學(xué)家探索位了于圣海倫娜的充滿了水的大洞穴，其地理位置在美國西部的，遠(yuǎn)離內(nèi)華達(dá)的海洋。在過去的幾百萬年，在圣海倫娜地下水沉淀了一種叫做方解石的礦物質(zhì)。通過對(duì)這些方解石的研究，我們能夠判定氣候的情況，了解過去 50 萬年氣溫的變化。不過，圣海倫娜的發(fā)現(xiàn)與在 20 世紀(jì) 70 年代的觀點(diǎn)是相互矛盾的，這樣的話，一個(gè)根本的問題產(chǎn)生了：到底是其中一個(gè)樣本的年代有問題，還是兩個(gè)樣本的年代都有問題？抑或科學(xué)家誤解了證據(jù)的意義？ 最后，到了 20 世紀(jì) 90 年代，科學(xué)家們對(duì)這兩個(gè)樣本重新進(jìn)行了的研究，并且發(fā)現(xiàn)海底獲取的樣本是正確的，在圣海倫娜發(fā)現(xiàn)的也是正確的。而現(xiàn)在，一般都認(rèn)為圣海倫娜發(fā)現(xiàn)的樣本僅僅體現(xiàn)了美國西部當(dāng)?shù)氐臍夂?，不能代表全球的氣候變化?
However, in the late 1980s, some scientists were exploring Devil's Hole, which is basically an extensive water-filled cave, far from the ocean, in Nevada, in the western United States. Over millions of years, groundwater left deposits of a mineral called calcite, on the rock within Devil's Hole. And by studying these calcite deposits, we can determine the climate conditions, the temperatures over the last half million years. Well, the Devil's Hole findings contradicted the ones obtained during the 1970s, so basically the question was, were the ages of one or both the samples were wrong, or were scientists misunderstanding the significance of the evidence. Well, in the 1990s, a new study was done on the two samples. And the ocean floor samples were found to be correct, as were the samples from Devil's Hole. And now it's generally believed that the samples from Devil's Hole correspond to variations in local climate, in the western United States, rather than global climate changes.
然而，在 20 世紀(jì) 80 年代后期，一些科學(xué)家探索位了于圣海倫娜的充滿了水的大洞穴，其地理位置在美國西部的，遠(yuǎn)離內(nèi)華達(dá)的海洋。在過去的幾百萬年，在圣海倫娜地下水沉淀了一種叫做方解石的礦物質(zhì)。通過對(duì)這些方解石的研究，我們能夠判定氣候的情況，了解過去 50 萬年氣溫的變化。不過，圣海倫娜的發(fā)現(xiàn)與在 20 世紀(jì) 70 年代的觀點(diǎn)是相互矛盾的，這樣的話，一個(gè)根本的問題產(chǎn)生了：到底是其中一個(gè)樣本的年代有問題，還是兩個(gè)樣本的年代都有問題？抑或科學(xué)家誤解了證據(jù)的意義？ 最后，到了 20 世紀(jì) 90 年代，科學(xué)家們對(duì)這兩個(gè)樣本重新進(jìn)行了的研究，并且發(fā)現(xiàn)海底獲取的樣本是正確的，在圣海倫娜發(fā)現(xiàn)的也是正確的。而現(xiàn)在，一般都認(rèn)為圣海倫娜發(fā)現(xiàn)的樣本僅僅體現(xiàn)了美國西部當(dāng)?shù)氐臍夂?，不能代表全球的氣候變化?