题目内容
Moon landing. The computer chip. Genetic engineering. The artificial heart. The achievements of U.S. scientists are known and admired throughout the world. But whether American highest position in research and technology will continue into the 21st century is far from certain. Thirty-two years after the Russians sent up Sputnik setting off a hot race to produce more and better U.S. physicists, the scientific pipeline is drying up. The reason for this crisis(危机): American science education is in disorder.
In an Educational Testing Service study of five countries and four Canadian provinces, American 13-year-olds graded last in math and nearly last in science.
How did America, birthplace of Thomas Edison and Wright brothers come to such a dangerous situation? One reason is lack of enough financial support for science education. After Sputnik, funding(基金)for the National Science Foundation, the leading U.S. founder of scientific research, shot up from 18 million dollars to 130 million dollars. By 1982 financing for NSFS education had fallen rapidly to zero.
To be sure, changeable funding is only one reason why U.S. scientists are becoming a scarce commodity(稀有商品). The image of scientists is less lustrous than it was in the 50’s and 60’s when men and women in lab coats were seen as national heroes helping the U.S. beat the Russians to the moon. Today, the country’s brightest desire is to be bankers and lawyers, not chemists or rocket designers.
1.From the passage, we can know that the computer chip, genetic engineering are _______.
A. examples of American scientific achievements
B.names of modern technology
C.seen everywhere throughout the world
D.obtained by Russia
2.America is losing its highest position in research and technology because _______.
A. American students are flowing to Canada
B.men and women in lab coats are seen as national heroes
C.Thomas Edison and Wright brothers died
D.financial support for science education is not enough and scientists are less respected
3.According to the passage Sputnik is _______.
A. a research project of National Science Foundation
B.the name of an education department
C.a scientific achievement of Russia
D.a scarce commodity
4. The word “lustrous” in the last paragraph can be replaced by_______.
A. difficult
B.shinning
C.smart
D.shocking
5.The main idea of the passage is that_______.
A. America’s leading position in scientific research is in danger
B.America’s needs more funding in scientific research
C.the National Science Foundation needs financial support
D.American students are not good in science
解析:
1.A 本题是细节题。从第一段“The achievements of U.S. scientists are known and…”可知,“登月、计算机芯片、基因工程”列举的是美国科学成就。 2.D 本题涉及美国科技正逐渐失去领先地位的原因。第三段“one reason is lack of”告诉我们主要是缺少资金。第四段说了另一原因:科学家们不如以前受尊重了。 3.C 本题考查词义判断。从第一段中“Thirty-two years after the Russians sent up Sputnik setting off a hot race”可知,Sputnik应该是前苏联的一项科学成就。 4.B 本题考查词义猜测。从最后一段可以判断,“现在美国科学家比以前少,主要是人们不再像五六十年代那样崇拜科学家”。 5.A 本题考查文章大意。整篇文章叙述了美国正面临在科技方面领先地位的危险和原因。
|
Which is sillier: denying we ever went to the moon or trying to convince the true non-believers?
Once upon a time—July 20, 1969, to be specific – two men got out of their little spaceship and wandered around on the moon for a while. Ten more men walked on the moon over the next three and a half years. The end.
Unfortunately, not quite. A fair number of Americans think that this whole business of moon landings really is a fairy tale. They believe that the landings were a big hoax (骗局) staged in the Mojave Desert, to convince everyone that U.S. technology was the “best” in the whole wide world.
Which is the harder thing to do: Send men to the moon or make believe we did? The fact is that the physics behind sending people to the moon is simple. You can do it with computers whose entire memory capacities can now fit on chips the size of postage stamps and that cost about as much as, well, a postage stamp. I know you can because we did.
However, last fall NASA considered spending $15,000 on a public-relations campaign to convince the unimpressed that Americans had in fact gone to the moon. That idea was mostly a reaction to a Fox television program, first aired in February 2001, that claimed to expose the hoax. The show’s creator is a publicity hound (猎狗) who has lived up to the name in more ways than one by hounding Buzz Aldrin, the second man on the moon. Mr. X (as I will call him, thereby denying him the joyous sight of his name in print) recently followed Buzz Aldrin around and called him “a thief, liar and coward” until the 72-year-old astronaut finally lost it and hit the 37-year-old Mr. X in the face.
Anyway, NASA’s publicity campaign began to slow down. The nonbelievers took the campaign as NASA’s effort to hide something while the believers said that $15,000 to convince people that the world was round — I mean, that we had gone to the moon — was simply a waste of money. (Actually, the $15,000 was supposed to pay for an article by James E. Oberg, an astronomy writer who, with Aldrin, has contributed to Scientific American.)
If NASA’s not paying Oberg, perhaps it could put the money to good use by hiring two big guys to drag Neil Armstrong out of the house. Armstrong is an extremely private man, but he is also the first man on the moon, so maybe he has a duty to be a bit more outspoken about the experience. Or NASA could just buy Aldrin a commemorate plaque (纪念匾) for his recent touch on the face of Mr. X.
【小题1】We can learn from Paragraphs 2 and 3 that some Americans believe _______.
| A.moon landings were invented |
| B.U.S. technology was the best |
| C.moon landing ended successfully |
| D.the Mojave Desert was the launching base |
| A.NASA’s publicity campaign. | B.The Fox television program. |
| C.Buzz Aldrin. | D.James E. Oberg. |
| A.proof to hide the truth |
| B.stupid and unnecessary |
| C.needed to convince the non-believers |
| D.important to develop space technology |
| A.NASA should not bother with the non-believers. |
| B.Armstrong was a very private and determined person. |
| C.Armstrong should be as outspoken as Buzz Aldrin. |
| D.NASA should send more astronauts to outer space. |
Which is sillier: denying we ever went to the moon or trying to convince the true nonbelievers?
Once upon a time – July 20, 1969, to be specific – two men got out of their little spaceship and wandered around on the moon for a while. Ten more men walked on the moon over the next three and a half years. The end.
Unfortunately, not quite. A fair number of Americans think that this whole business of moon landings really is a fairy tale. They believe that the landings were a big hoax (骗局) staged in the Mojave Desert, to convince everyone that U.S. technology was the “bestest” in the whole wide world.
Which is the harder thing to do: Send men to the moon or make believe we did? The fact is the physics behind sending people to the moon is simple. You can do it with computers whose entire memory capacities can now fit on chips the size of postage stamps and that cost about as much as, well, a postage stamp. I know you can because we did.
However, last fall NASA considered spending $15,000 on a public-relations campaign to convince the unimpressed that Americans had in fact gone to the moon. That idea was mostly a reaction to a Fox television program, first aired in February 2001, that claimed to expose the hoax. The show’s creator is a publicity hound (猎狗) who has lived up to the name in more ways than one by hounding Buzz Aldrin, the second man on the moon. Mr. X (as I will call him, thereby denying him the joyous sight of his name in print) recently followed Buzz Aldrin around and called him “a thief, liar and coward” until the 72-year-old astronaut finally lost it and hit the 37-year-old Mr. X in the face.
Anyway, NASA’s publicity campaign began to slow down. The nonbelievers took the campaign as NASA’s effort to hide something while the believers said that $15,000 to convince people that the world was round — I mean, that we had gone to the moon — was simply a waste of money. (Actually, the $15,000 was supposed to pay for an article by James E. Oberg, an astronomy writer who, with Aldrin, has contributed to Scientific American.)
If NASA’s not paying Oberg, perhaps it could put the money to good use by hiring two big guys to drag Neil Armstrong out of the house. Armstrong is an extremely private man, but he is also the first man on the moon, so maybe he has a duty to be a bit more outspoken about the experience. Or NASA could just buy Aldrin a commemorate plaque (纪念匾) for his recent touch on the face of Mr. X.
【小题1】We can learn from Paragraphs 2 and 3 that some Americans believe _______.
| A.moon landings were invented |
| B.U.S. technology was the best |
| C.moon landing ended successfully |
| D.the Mojave Desert was the launching base |
| A.NASA’s publicity campaign. | B.The Fox television program. |
| C.Buzz Aldrin. | D.James E. Oberg. |
| A.told a faithful story | B.was not treated properly |
| C.was a talented creator | D.had a bad reputation |
| A.proof to hide the truth |
| B.stupid and unnecessary |
| C.needed to convince the non-believers |
| D.important to develop space technology |
| A.angry | B.conversational | C.humorous | D.matter-of-fact |