大学英语试卷及答案2 联系客服

slaves:语法结构题。此句是说大多数生物都是它们生存环境的“奴隶”,意思是说大多数生物都依赖着它们所生存的环境,空格处前面是are,因此空格处需要一个名词的复数形式来表示“奴隶”,所以此处填入slaves。

alter:综合理解题。上文提到了大多数生物都依赖着它们所生存的环境,此句要表达的是一些生物可以改变周边的环境特征以适应自己的生存需要。空格处需要填入一个动词原形来表示“改变”的意思, 选项中alter符合题意,所以此处填入alter。 shelter:句子意思题。此句要表达的意思是,许多鸟类和昆虫会筑精美的巢穴作为它们的孩子们的避难所,空格处需要一个名词来表示“避难所,庇护所”的意思,选项中只有shelter符合题意,所以此处填入shelter。 27.正确答案为 A) normally 你选对了!

解析:A) normally

28.正确答案为 J) permanent 你选对了!

解析:J) permanent

29.正确答案为 M) enables 你选对了!

解析:M) enables

30.正确答案为 O) local 你选对了!

解析:O) local

31.正确答案为 E) scattered 你选对了!

解析:E) scattered

32.正确答案为 I) reproduces 你选对了!

解析:I) reproduces

33.正确答案为 K) slaves 你选对了!

解析:K) slaves

34.正确答案为 H) alter 你选对了!

解析:H) alter

35.正确答案为 B) shelter 你选对了!

解析:B) shelter

Section B Match

Directions:In this section, you are going to read a passage with ten statements attached to it. Each statement contains information given in one of the paragraphs. Identify the paragraph from which the information is derived.You may choose a paragraph more than once.Each paragraph is marked with a letter.

本题得分:8.0/10分

A Recently, climate scientists have taken a widely-spreading criticism in the media and on the Internet, accused of hiding data, covering up errors and preventing others from expressing views. Their response until now has been largely to assert the legitimacy (合法性) of the vast body of climate science and to call their critics as know-nothings.But the volume of criticism and the depth of doubt have only grown, and many scientists now realize they are facing a crisis of public confidence and have to fight back. Up to now, they are beginning to face their critics, admit mistakes, open up their data and reshape their working way.

B The release last fall of hundreds of e-mail messages from a major climate research center in England, and more recent exposure of a handful of errors in a supposedly authoritative United Nations report on climate change, have created what a number of top scientists say is a major destruction of faith in their research. They say this strong threat has undermined decades of work and has badly damaged public trust in the science.

C The e-mail episode, called \by critics, revealed arrogance (傲慢) and what one top climate researcher called \(宗派意识)\among some scientists. The correspondence appears to show efforts to limit publication of

contrary opinions and to escape \of Information Act\requests. The content of the messages opened some well-known scientists to charges of concealing temperature data from rival researchers and manipulating results to be consistent with precooked conclusions. \e-mails,\admitted. But he sharply disagreed with charges that he had hidden data or faked results.

D After the e-mail was exposed, serious damage has already been done. A survey conducted in late December by Yale University and George Mason University found that the number of Americans who believed that climate change was just scientific cheat had more than doubled since 2008, to 16 percent of the population from 7 percent. An additional 13 percent of Americans said they thought that even if the planet was warming, it was a result solely of natural factors and was not a significant concern.

E Climate scientists have been shaken by the criticism and are beginning to look for ways to recover their reputation. \was just not prepared for the scale and intensity of the attacks and they simply have not responded quickly and appropriately,\said Peter C. Frumhoff, an ecologist and chief scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists. \need to acknowledge the errors and help turn attention from what's happening in the blogosphere (博客圈) to what's happening in the atmosphere.\

F A number of institutions are beginning efforts to improve the quality of their science and to make their work more understandable. The official British climate agency is undertaking a complete review of its temperature data and will make its records and analysis fully public for the first time. Two universities are investigating the work of top climate scientists to determine whether they have violated academic standards and broken faith in science. The National Academy of Sciences is preparing to publish a non-technical paper outlining what is known—and not known—about changes to the global climate. And a hot debate is under way among climate scientists on how to make their work more transparent and regain public confidence.

G Some critics think these are merely useless efforts that do not address the real problem, however. Willis Eschenbach, an engineer and climate critic who posts frequently on climate skeptic (怀疑的) blogs, wrote in response to one climate scientist's proposal to share more research. \to advertize for fake science. I don't want you to figure out how to inspire trust by covering your dishonest practices in new and creative ways. You should just do more successful and creative science.\

H Ralph J. Cicerone, president of the National Academy of Sciences, the most well-known scientific body in the United States, said that there was a danger that the distrust of climate science could mushroom into doubts about scientific inquiry more broadly. He said that scientists must do a better job of policing themselves and trying to be heard over the loudest voices on cable news, talk radio and the