Recently there was a major discovery in the scientific research — the mapping of all DNA in a human gene(基因) is complete. Couple of years ago, this seems an impossible task for scientist to accomplish. All this progress in science leads us to believe that the day, when the human being will be cloned, is not far away. Human cloning has always been a topic of argument, in terms of morality(道德) or religion.
Taking a look at why cloning might be beneficial, among many cases, it is arguable that parents who are known to be at risk of passing a genetic limitation to a child could make use of cloning. If the clone was free of genetic limitations, then the other clone would be as well. The latter could be inserted in the woman and allowed to ripen to term. Moreover, cloning would enable women, who can’t get pregnant, to have children of their own.
Cloning humans would also mean that organs could be cloned, so it would be a source of perfect transfer organs. This surely would be greatly beneficial to millions of unfortunate people around the world that are expected to lose their lives due to failure of single (or more) organ(s). It is also arguable that a ban on cloning may be unlawful and would rob people of the right to reproduce and limit the freedom of scientists.
Arguments against cloning are also on a perfectly practical side. Primarily, I believe that cloning would step in the normal “cycle” of life. There would be a large number of same genes, which reduce the chances of improvement, and, in turn, development — the fundamental reason how living things naturally adapt to the ever-changing environment. Life processes failing to do so might result in untimely disappearance. Furthermore, cloning would make the uniqueness that each one of us possesses disappear, thus leading to creation of genetically engineered groups of people for specific purposes, and chances are that those individuals would be regarded as “objects” rather than people in the society.
Scientists haven’t 100% guaranteed that the first cloned humans will be normal. Thus, this could result in introduction of additional limitations in the human “gene-pool”.
Regarding such arguable topics in “black or white” approach seems very innocent to me personally. We should rather try to look at all “shades” of it. I believe that cloning is only legal if its purpose is for cloning organs; not humans. Then we could regard this as for “saving life” instead of “creating life”. I believe cloning humans is morally and socially unacceptable.
1.Which of the following is true according to the passage?
A. Genetic limitations will be beneficial for some women.
B. A large number of genes will prevent us from developing.
C. First cloned humans might be normal according to scientists.
D. Forbidding cloning might limit the freedom of scientists.
2.What’s the author’s opinion on cloning?
A. It should be entirely banned. B. It is acceptable if it is used for cloning organs.
C. It will take away the right to reproduce. D. It should be used in creating life.
3.Where can you read this article?
A. In a story book. B. In a magazine.
C. In a science fiction. D. In a novel.
4.Which of the following shows the structure of the passage(1—6 refer to paragraph 1—6)?
高三英语阅读理解简单题
Recently there was a major discovery in the scientific research — the mapping of all DNA in a human gene(基因) is complete.Couple of years ago, this seems an impossible task for scientist to accomplish.All this progress in science leads us to believe that the day, when the human being will be cloned, is not far away.Human cloning has always been a topic of argument, in terms of morality(道德) or religion.
Taking a look at why cloning might be beneficial, among many cases, it is arguable that parents who are known to be at risk of passing a genetic limitation to a child could make use of cloning.If the clone was free of genetic limitations, then the other clone would be as well.The latter could be inserted in the woman and allowed to ripen to term.Moreover, cloning would enable women, who can’t get pregnant, to have children of their own.
Cloning humans would also mean that organs could be cloned, so it would be a source of perfect transfer organs.This surely would be greatly beneficial to millions of unfortunate people around the world that are expected to lose their lives due to failure of single (or more) organ(s).It is also arguable that a ban on cloning may be unlawful and would rob people of the right to reproduce and limit the freedom of scientists.
Arguments against cloning are also on a perfectly practical side.Primarily, I believe that cloning would step in the normal “cycle” of life.There would be a large number of same genes, which reduce the chances of improvement, and, in turn, development — the fundamental reason how living things naturally adapt to the ever-changing environment.Life processes failing to do so might result in untimely disappearance.Furthermore, cloning would make the uniqueness that each one of us possesses disappear, thus leading to creation of genetically engineered groups of people for specific purposes, and chances are that those individuals would be regarded as “objects” rather than people in the society.
Scientists haven’t 100% guaranteed that the first cloned humans will be normal.Thus, this could result in introduction of additional limitations in the human “gene-pool”.
Regarding such arguable topics in “black or white” approach seems very innocent to me personally.We should rather try to look at all “shades” of it.I believe that cloning is only legal if its purpose is for cloning organs; not humans.Then we could regard this as for “saving life” instead of “creating life”.I believe cloning humans is morally and socially unacceptable.
1.Which of the following is true according to the passage?
A.Genetic limitations will be beneficial for some women.
B.A large number of genes will prevent us from developing.
C.First cloned humans might be normal according to scientists.
D.Forbidding cloning might limit the freedom of scientists.
2.What’s the author’s opinion on cloning?
A.It should be entirely banned.
B.It is acceptable if it is used for cloning organs.
C.It will take away the right to reproduce.
D.It should be used in creating life.
3.Where can you read this article?
A.In a story book. B.In a magazine.
C.In a science fiction. D.In a novel.
4.Which of the following shows the structure of the passage(1—6 refer to paragraph 1—6)?
A. | B. |
C. | D. |
高三英语阅读理解困难题查看答案及解析
Recently there was a major discovery in the scientific research — the mapping of all DNA in a human gene(基因) is complete. Couple of years ago, this seems an impossible task for scientist to accomplish. All this progress in science leads us to believe that the day, when the human being will be cloned, is not far away. Human cloning has always been a topic of argument, in terms of morality(道德) or religion.
Taking a look at why cloning might be beneficial, among many cases, it is arguable that parents who are known to be at risk of passing a genetic limitation to a child could make use of cloning. If the clone was free of genetic limitations, then the other clone would be as well. The latter could be inserted in the woman and allowed to ripen to term. Moreover, cloning would enable women, who can’t get pregnant, to have children of their own.
Cloning humans would also mean that organs could be cloned, so it would be a source of perfect transfer organs. This surely would be greatly beneficial to millions of unfortunate people around the world that are expected to lose their lives due to failure of single (or more) organ(s). It is also arguable that a ban on cloning may be unlawful and would rob people of the right to reproduce and limit the freedom of scientists.
Arguments against cloning are also on a perfectly practical side. Primarily, I believe that cloning would step in the normal “cycle” of life. There would be a large number of same genes, which reduce the chances of improvement, and, in turn, development — the fundamental reason how living things naturally adapt to the ever-changing environment. Life processes failing to do so might result in untimely disappearance. Furthermore, cloning would make the uniqueness that each one of us possesses disappear, thus leading to creation of genetically engineered groups of people for specific purposes, and chances are that those individuals would be regarded as “objects” rather than people in the society.
Scientists haven’t 100% guaranteed that the first cloned humans will be normal. Thus, this could result in introduction of additional limitations in the human “gene-pool”.
Regarding such arguable topics in “black or white” approach seems very innocent to me personally. We should rather try to look at all “shades” of it. I believe that cloning is only legal if its purpose is for cloning organs; not humans. Then we could regard this as for “saving life” instead of “creating life”. I believe cloning humans is morally and socially unacceptable.
1.Which of the following is true according to the passage?
A. Genetic limitations will be beneficial for some women.
B. A large number of genes will prevent us from developing.
C. First cloned humans might be normal according to scientists.
D. Forbidding cloning might limit the freedom of scientists.
2.What’s the author’s opinion on cloning?
A. It should be entirely banned. B. It is acceptable if it is used for cloning organs.
C. It will take away the right to reproduce. D. It should be used in creating life.
3.Where can you read this article?
A. In a story book. B. In a magazine.
C. In a science fiction. D. In a novel.
4.Which of the following shows the structure of the passage(1—6 refer to paragraph 1—6)?
高三英语阅读理解简单题查看答案及解析
Recently there was a major discovery in the scientific research—the mapping of all DNA in a human gene(基因)is complete. Couple of years ago, this seems an impossible task for scientist to accomplish. All this progress in science leads us to believe that the day, when the human being will be cloned, is not far away. Human cloning has always been a topic of argument,in terms of morality or religion.
Taking a look at why cloning might be beneficial, among many cases, it is arguable that parents who are known to be at risk of passing a genetic limitation to a child could make use of cloning. If the clone was free of genetic limitations. Then the other clone would be as well. The latter could foe inserted in the woman and allowed to ripen to term. Moreover,cloning would enable women, who can’t get pregnant, to have children of their own.
Cloning humans would also mean that organs could be cloned, so it would be a source of perfect transfer organs. This, surely would be greatly beneficial to millions of unfortunate people around the world that are expected to lose their lives due to failure of single(or more) organ(s).It is also arguable that a ban on cloning may be unlawful and would rob people of the right to reproduce and limit the freedom of scientists.
Arguments against cloning are also on a perfectly practical side. Primarily, I believe that cloning would step in the normal “cycle”of life. There would be a large number of same genes., which reduce the chances of improvement,and, in turn, development-the fundamental reason how living things naturally adapt to the ever-changing environment. Life processes failing to do so might result in untimely disappearance. Furthermore, cloning would make the uniqueness that each one of us possesses disappea. Thus, leading to creation of genetically engineered groups of people for specific purposes and, chances are, that those individuals would be regarded as “objects” rather than people in the society.
Scientists haven’t 100 percent. guaranteed that the first cloned will be normal. Thus this could result in introduction of additional limitations in the human “gene-pool”.
Regarding such arguable topics in “black or white” approach seems very innocent to me personally. We should rather try to look at all “shades: of it. I believe that cloning is only legal if its purpose is for cloning organs, not humans. Then we could regard this as for “saving life” instead of “creating life”. I believe cloning humans is morally and socially unacceptable.
1.Which of the following is true according to the passage?
A. Genetic limitation will be beneficial for some women
B. A large number of genes will prevent us from developing
C. Prohibition of cloning might limit the freedom of scientists
D. First cloned humans might be normal according to scientists
2.What’s the author’s opinion on cloning?
A. Cloning should be entirely banned
B. Cloning should be used in creating life
C. Cloning will take away the right to reproduce
D. Cloning is acceptable if it is used for cloning organs
3.Where can you read this article?
A. In a story book. B. In a magazine. C. In a science fiction D. In a brochure
4. Which of the following shows the structure of the passage
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析
Recently there was a major discovery in the scientific research—the mapping of all DNA in a human gene(基因) is complete.Couple of years ago, this seems an impossible task for scientist to accomplish.All this progress in science leads us to believe that the day, when the human being will be cloned, is not far away.Human cloning has always been a topic of argument, in terms of morality or religion.
Taking a look at why cloning might be beneficial, among many cases, it is arguable that parents who are known to be at risk of passing a genetic limitation to a child could make use of cloning.If the clone was free of genetic limitations.then the other clone would be as well.The latter could foe inserted in the woman and allowed to ripen to term.Moreover, cloning would enable women, who can't get pregnant, to have children of their own.
Cloning humans would also mean that organs could be cloned, so it would be a source of perfect transfer organs.This, surely would be greatly beneficial to millions of unfortunate people around the world that are expected to lose their lives due to failure of single (or more) organ (s).It is also arguable that a ban on cloning may be unlawful and would rob people of the right to reproduce and limit the freedom of scientists.
Arguments against cloning are also on a perfectly practical side.Primarily, I believe that cloning would step in the normal "cycle" of life.There would be a large number of same genes, which reduce the chances of improvement, and, in turn, development—the fundamental reason how living things naturally adapt to the ever-changing environment.Life processes failing to do so might result in untimely disappearance.Furthermore, cloning would make the uniqueness that each one of us possesses disappear.Thus, leading to creation of genetically engineered groups of people for specific purposes and, chances are, that those individuals would be regarded as "objects" rather than people in the society.
Scientists haven't 100 per cent.guaranteed that the first cloned humans will be normal.Thus this could result in introduction of additional limitations in the human "gene-pool".
Regarding such arguable topics in "black or white" approach seems very innocent to me personally.We should rather try to look at all "shades" of it.I believe that cloning is only legal if its purpose is for cloning organs; not humans.Then we could regard this as for "saving life" instead of "creating life".I believe cloning humans is morally and socially unacceptable.
1.Which of the following is true according to the passage?
A.Genetic limitation will be beneficial for some women
B.A large number of genes will prevent us from developing
C.Prohibition of cloning might limit the freedom of scientists
D.First cloned humans might be normal according to scientists
2.What's the author's opinion on cloning?
A.Cloning should be entirely banned.
B.Cloning should be used in creating life.
C.Cloning will take away the right to reproduce.
D.Cloning is acceptable if it is used for cloning organs.
3.Where can you read this article?
A.In a story book
B.In a magazine
C.In a science fiction
D.In a brochure
4.Which of the following shows the structure of the passage?
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析
Recently there was a major discovery in the scientific research—the mapping of all DNA in a human gene(基因)is complete. Couple of years ago, this seems an impossible task for scientist to accomplish. All this progress in science leads us to believe that the day, when the human being will be cloned, is not far away. Human cloning has always been a topic of argument,in terms of morality or religion.
Taking a look at why cloning might be beneficial, among many cases, it is arguable that parents who are known to be at risk of passing a genetic limitation to a child could make use of cloning. If the clone was free of genetic limitations. Then the other clone would be as well. The latter could foe inserted in the woman and allowed to ripen to term. Moreover,cloning would enable women, who can’t get pregnant, to have children of their own.
Cloning humans would also mean that organs could be cloned, so it would be a source of perfect transfer organs. This, surely would be greatly beneficial to millions of unfortunate people around the world that are expected to lose their lives due to failure of single(or more) organ(s).It is also arguable that a ban on cloning may be unlawful and would rob people of the right to reproduce and limit the freedom of scientists.
Arguments against cloning are also on a perfectly practical side. Primarily, I believe that cloning would step in the normal “cycle”of life. There would be a large number of same genes., which reduce the chances of improvement,and, in turn, development-the fundamental reason how living things naturally adapt to the ever-changing environment. Life processes failing to do so might result in untimely disappearance. Furthermore, cloning would make the uniqueness that each one of us possesses disappea. Thus, leading to creation of genetically engineered groups of people for specific purposes and, chances are, that those individuals would be regarded as “objects” rather than people in the society.Scientists haven’t 100 percent. guaranteed that the first cloned will be normal. Thus this could result in introduction of additional limitations in the human “gene-pool”.
Regarding such arguable topics in “black or white” approach seems very innocent to me personally. We should rather try to look at all “shades: of it. I believe that cloning is only legal if its purpose is for cloning organs, not humans. Then we could regard this as for “saving life” instead of “creating life”. I believe cloning humans is morally and socially unacceptable.
1.Which of the following is true according to the passage?
A. Genetic limitation will be beneficial for some women
B. A large number of genes will prevent us from developing
C. Prohibition of cloning might limit the freedom of scientists
D. First cloned humans might be normal according to scientists
2.What’s the author’s opinion on cloning?
A. Cloning should be entirely banned
B. Cloning should be used in creating life
C. Cloning will take away the right to reproduce
D. Cloning is acceptable if it is used for cloning organs
3.Where can you read this article?
A. In a story book. B. In a magazine. C. In a science fiction D. In a brochure
4.Which of the following shows the structure of the passage
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析
Scientists ______ SARS for several months before a major discovery was made in the field.
A.had been studying | B.have been studying |
C.have studied | D.are studying |
高三英语单项填空简单题查看答案及解析
The two Chinese scientists have made a wonderful discovery, which marks a major _______ in the basic research in the field.
A. reform B. approach C. boundary D. breakthrough
高三英语单项填空中等难度题查看答案及解析
An article published recently in the scientific journal Nature is shedding new light on an important, but so far little has been appreciated, aspect of human evolution. In this article, Professors Dennis Bramble, and Daniel Lieberman suggest that the ability to run was a decisive factor in the development of our species. According to the two scientists, humans possess a number of anatomical(人体结构的)features that make them surprisingly good runners. “We are very confident that strong selection for running,which came at the expense of the historical ability to live in trees-was helpful in the origin of the modern human body form,” says Bramble, a biology professor at the University of Utah.
Traditional thinking up to now has been that the upright body form of modern humans has come about as a result of the ability to walk, and that running is simply a by-product of walking. Furthermore, humans have usually been regarded as poor runners compared to such animals as dogs, horses or antelopes. However, this is only true if we consider fast running over short distances. Even Olympic athlete can hardly run as fast as a horse can gallop, and can only keep up a top speed for fifteen seconds or so. Horses and antelopes, on the other hand, can run at top speed for several minutes, clearly outperforming us in this respect. But when it comes to long-distance running, humans do astonishingly well. They can maintain a steady pace for miles, and their overall speed compares favorably with that of horses or dogs.
Bramble and Lieberman examined twenty-six anatomical features found in humans. One of the most interesting of these is the nuchal ligament(颈背的韧带). When we run, it is this ligament that prevents our head from pitching back and forth or from side to side. Therefore, we are able to run with steady heads held high. The nuchal ligament is not found in any other surviving primates(灵长类动物), although the fossil(化石)record shows that Homo erectus, an early human species that walked upright, much as we do, also had one. Then there are our Achilles tendons(跟腱)at the backs of our legs, which have nothing to do with walking. When we run, these tendons behave like springs, helping to push us forward. Furthermore, we have low, wide shoulders, virtually disconnected from our skulls (the bony part of the head), another anatomical adaptation which allows us to run more efficiently.
But what evolutionary advantage is gained from being good long-distance runners? One assumption is that this ability may have permitted early humans to obtain food more effectively. “What these features and fossil facts appear to be telling us is that running evolved in order for our direct ancestors to compete with other carnivores (animals that eat meat) for access to the protein needed to grow the big brains that we enjoy today.” says Lieberman.
1.We can learn from the passage that the human ability to run _______.
A. was only recently described in a scientific journal
B. played an important part in human evolution
C. was considered more natural than the ability to live in trees
D. contributed to the form of human language
2.According to the second paragraph, humans _______
A. are better runners than most other animals
B. are not good at running short distances
C. compare unfavorably with horses and dogs
D. are poor long-distance runners
3.It appears that the nuchal ligament _______.
A. enables us to run with steady heads
B. is found in modern primates only
C. prevents the head from being held high
D. is a unique feature of carnivores
4.The passage does NOT tell us that _______
A. early humans had an advantage in obtaining food thanks to the running ability
B. fossils help us better understand human evolution.
C. our Achilles tendons are an adaptation for running efficiently
D. big brains may have been evolved for running long-distance
高三英语阅读理解困难题查看答案及解析
Recently, online hike-sharing has become the new favorite in China. In major cities, bikes in, yellow, orange, blue, white and green, can be seen almost everywhere on the street. It seems that these bikes appeared suddenly, adding a new beautiful scenery to Chinese cities.
Both the market and the public welcome online bike-sharing, but is it really a promising business? Well, it depends. After all, online bike-sharing platforms can never get away with huge operating cost and uncertain government policy.
Some theorists might say that online bike-sharing platforms can earn a fortune simply through deposit. Since users will always need to rent bikes, their deposit will always be kept to online bike-sharing platforms.
However,although online bike-sharing platforms may be able to use the deposit for other purposes at the primary stage, they will have to set up a special account, so that the deposit shall be used specially for its designated (指定的) purpose. As the market gets increasingly mature, they will have to do so whether to be responsible for users or in consideration of possible government regulations.
Now that online hike-sharing platforms can,t make profit through deposit,how can they become profitable as fiercer market unfolds? Although Hu Weiwei, CEO of Mobike, stated in an article that she would take Mobike as charitable(慈善的) project if she failed, running a startup is absolutely different from managing a charity organization. After all , she has to pay back investors’ billions of investment(投资).
To make profit, online bike-sharing platforms might have toincrease rent fee for each trip, just as Didi did
From this aspect, it might be a really good business. If we consider full screen ads fee, recommendation fee for business owners, etc. , its annual income might reach at least RMB 15 billion. If we consider the huge operation cost, including bike repairs,bikes’ service life and labor cost, there might not be much net profit left. After all, offline operation cost has always been an unbearable burden for such internet plus mode-based startups.
1.How does the author feel about the future of online bike-sharing platforms?
A. Optimistic. B. Doubtful.
C. Hopeful. D. Secure.
2.How do some theorists think online bike-sharing platforms can make money?
A. Through advertisements. B. Through services.
C. Through deposit. D. Through investment.
3.How should deposit be dealt with when the market is mature according to the author?
A. Used for other purposes. B. Kept in a special account.
C. Used for charity. D. Left aside to the users.
4.What does the underlined word “unfolds” mean in the passage?
A. Shrinks. B. Spreads. C. Shows. D. Develops.
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析
Recently, online hike-sharing has become the new favorite in China. In major cities, bikes in, yellow, orange, blue, white and green, can be seen almost everywhere on the street. It seems that these bikes appeared suddenly, adding a new beautiful scenery to Chinese cities.
Both the market and the public welcome online bike-sharing, but is it really a promising business? Well, it depends. After all, online bike-sharing platforms can never get away with huge operating cost and uncertain government policy.
Some theorists might say that online bike-sharing platforms can earn a fortune simply through deposit. Since users will always need to rent bikes, their deposit will always be kept to online bike-sharing platforms.
However, although online bike-sharing platforms may be able to use the deposit for other purposes at the primary stage, they will have to set up a special account, so that the deposit shall be used specially for its designated (指定的) purpose. As the market gets increasingly mature, they will have to do so whether to be responsible for users or in consideration of possible government regulations.
Now that online hike-sharing platforms can’t make profit through deposit,how can they become profitable as fiercer market unfolds? Although Hu Weiwei, CEO of Mobike, stated in an article that she would take Mobike as charitable(慈善的) project if she failed, running a startup is absolutely different from managing a charity organization. After all , she has to pay back investors’ billions of investment(投资).
To make profit, online bike-sharing platforms might have to increase rent fee for each trip, just as Didi did.
From this aspect, it might be a really good business. If we consider full screen ads fee, recommendation fee for business owners, etc. , its annual income might reach at least RMB 15 billion. If we consider the huge operation cost, including bike repairs,bikes’ service life and labor cost, there might not be much net profit left. After all, offline operation cost has always been an unbearable burden for such internet plus mode-based startups.
1.How does the author feel about the future of online bike-sharing platforms?
A. Optimistic. B. Doubtful.
C. Hopeful. D. Secure.
2.How do some theorists think online bike-sharing platforms can make money?
A. Through advertisements. B. Through services.
C. Through deposit. D. Through investment.
3.How should deposit be dealt with when the market is mature according to the author?
A. Used for other purposes.
B. Kept in a special account.
C. Used for charity.
D. Left aside to the users.
4.What does the underlined word "unfolds" mean in the passage?
A. Shrinks. B. Spreads.
C. Shows. D. Develops.
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析