科技英语试题及答案(三)

V

1.

I spent some of the most exciting days of my life working on the eastern shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana, searching for the fossilized remains of our early ancestors. We did not always find what we wanted, but every day there was much more to discover than the traces of our own predecessors. The fossils, some quite complete, others mere fragments, spoke of another world in which the ancestors of many of today’s African mammals roamed in the rich grassland and forest fringes between 1.5 million and 2 million years ago. The environment was not too different from the wetter grasslands of Africa today, but it was full of amazing animals that are now long extinct.

One in particular I would have loved to see alive was a short-necked giraffe relative that had huge “antlers”, some with a span across the horns of close to almost 3 meters. There were buffalo-size antelopes with massive curving horns, carnivores that must have looked like saber-toothed lions, two distinct species of hippo and at least two types of elephants. We may never know the full extent of this incredible mammalian diversity, but there were probably more than twice as many species a million years ago as there are today.

That was true not just for Africa. The fossil record tells the same story everywhere. Most of life’s experiments have ended in extinction. It is estimated that more than 95% of the species that have existed over the past 600 million years are gone.

So, should we be concerned about the current spasm of extinction, which has been accelerated by the inexorable expansion of agriculture and industry? Is it necessary to try to slow down a process that has been going on forever?

I believe it is. We know that the well-being of human race is tied to the well-being of many other species, and we can’t be sure which species are most important to our own survival.

But dealing with the extinction crisis is no simple matter, since much of the world’s biodiversity resides in its poorest nations, especially in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Can such countries justify setting aside national parks and nature reserves where human encroachment and even access is forbidden? Is it legitimate to spend large sums of money to save some species — be it an elephant or an orchid — in a nation in which a sizable percentage of the people are living below the poverty line?

Such questions make me uneasy about promoting wildlife conservation in impoverished nations. Nonetheless, I believe that we can — and should — do a great deal. It’s a matter of changing priorities. Plenty of money is available for scientific field studies and conferences on endangering species. But what about boots and vehicles for park personnel who protect wildlife from poachers? What about development aid to give local people economic alternatives to cutting forests and plowing over the land? That kind of funding is difficult to come by.

People in poor countries should not be asked to choose between their own short-term survival and long-term environmental needs. If their governments are

willing to protect the environment, the money needed should come from international sources. To me, the choice is clear. Either the more affluent world helps now or the world as a whole will lose out.

Of course, we must be careful not to allow the establishment of slush funds or rely on short-term, haphazard handouts that the world would probably go to waste. We need a permanent global endowment devoted to wildlife protection, funded

primarily by the governments of the industrial nations and international aid agencies. The principal could remain invested in the donor nations as the interest flowed steadily into conservation efforts.

How to use those funds would be a matter of endless debate. Should local communities be entitled to set the agenda, or should outside experts take control? Should limited hunting be allowed in parks, or should they be put off limits? Mistakes will be made, the landscape will keep changing, and species will still be lost, but the difficulty of the task should not lead us to abandon hope. Many of the planet’s natural habitats are gone forever, bur many others can be saved and in time restored.

A major challenge for the 21st century is to preserve as much of our natural estate as possible. Let us resist with all our efforts any moves to reduce the amount of wild land available for wild species. And let us call upon the world’s richest nations to provide the money to make that possible. That would not be a contribution to charity; it would be an investment in the future of humanity — and all life on Earth.

1). The purpose of the author’s work on the eastern shores of Lake Turkana was ______. A. to discover the fossil history of African mammals B. to search for the traces of the extinct animal species C. to discover the fossils of human being’s predecessors

D. to study the fragments of the fossils of the ancestors of African mammals 满分：2 分

2). The following is true EXCEPT ______.

A. The welfare of the human species is bound up with that of the other species.

B. Human development in agriculture and industry speeds up the process of distinction of

some species.

C. Fossil history suggests that 95% of the species will be a failure in their struggles for survival.

D. The process of the extinction of species seems to be going on ceaselessly.

满分：2 分

3). To which of the following would the author probably say “No”?

A. Should we be concerned about the extinction of the species, which has been accelerated by

the expansion of agriculture and industry?

B. Should a nation, most of whose people are still living below the poverty line, spend large sums of money to preserve species?

C. Is it necessary to provide woodcutters in poverty-stricken nations with the economic alternatives to making a living on cutting down trees?

D. Is it necessary to change our priorities and provide more equipment and support for wildlife protection personnel?

满分：2 分

4). The author’s main purpose of writing this article is ______.

A. to champion a global fund mainly from the affluent nations and international efforts to

preserve the wildlife

B. to warn the rich nations against the losing out in protecting the global environment C. to persuade the impoverished people to sacrifice their short-term benefit for long-term protection of the biodiversity

D. to take into account the difficulty of wildlife protection and stop endless debate

满分：2 分

5). The author’s attitude towards preserving the natural habitats is ______. A. uncertain B. positive C. hopeless D. uneasy

阅读理解答案 题号 答案

1 C 2 C 3 C 4 A 5 B