2. 医学
  3. Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn’t know

Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn’t know

admin2013-12-14  18
问题     Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn’t know for sure? That the evidence was inconclusive, the science uncertain? That the antismoking lobby was out to destroy our way of life and the government should stay out of the way? Lots of Americans bought that nonsense, and over three decades, some 10 million smokers went to early graves.
    There are upsetting parallels today, as scientists in one wave after another try to awaken us to the growing threat of global warming. The latest was a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, enlisted by the White House, to tell us that the Earth’s atmosphere is definitely warming and that the problem is largely man-made. The clear message is that we should get moving to protect ourselves. The president of the National Academy, Bruce Alberts, added this key point in the preface to the panel’s report "Science never has all the answers. But science does provide us with the best available guide to the future, and it is critical that our nation and the world base important policies on the best judgments that science can provide concerning the future consequences of present actions."
    Just as on smoking, voices now come from many quarters insisting that the science about global warming is incomplete, that it’s OK to keep pouring fumes into the air until we know for sure. This is a dangerous game: by the 100 percent of the evidence is in, it may be too late. With the risks obvious and growing, a prudent people would take out an insurance policy now.
Fortunately, the White House is starting to pay attention. But it’s obvious that a majority of the president’s advisers still don’t take global warming seriously. Instead of a plan of action, they continue to press for more research-a classic case of "paralysis by analysis".
    To serve as responsible stewards of the planet, we must press forward on deeper atmospheric and oceanic research but research alone is inadequate. If the Administration won’t take the legislative initiative, Congress should help to begin fashioning conservation measures. A bill by Democratic Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, which would offer financial incentives for private industry, is a promising start. Many see that the country is getting ready to build lots of new power plants to meet our energy needs. If we are ever going to protect the atmosphere, it is crucial that those new plants be environmentally sound.
An argument made by supporters of smoking was that______.
选项 A、there was no scientific evidence of the correlation between smoking and death
B、the number of early deaths of smokers in the past decades was insignificant
C、people had the freedom to choose their own way of life
D、antismoking people were usually talking nonsense
答案C
解析 问：支持吸烟的人的观点是什么?可以用排除法来做。选项A的意思是：没有科学证据来证明吸烟和死亡的相关性。文章第一段第二句话：“That the evidence was inconclusive，the scienceuncertain?”此旬的意思是说，证据是非结论性的，还没有科学的确定性。但是这并不表明没有科学的证据存在，只是说科学的证明还不确定和非结论性。这是不同的概念。选项B的意思是：在过去的几十年里，因为吸烟而过早去世的人的总数不重要。文章中没有提到这个问题。选项D足，反对吸烟者经常胡言乱语。文章中第一段的最后这个句子：“Lots of Americans bought that nonsense，”此句说明大多数美国人都相信了这些胡言乱语，并没有说反对吸烟者常胡言乱语。再看文章第一段第三句：“that the antismoking lobby was out to destroy our way of life and the govemment should stayout of the way?”意为：反对吸烟的游说是为了毁掉我们的生活方式，而政府应该置身事外吗?这句话其实就足讲，人们有权选择自己的生活方式。这符合选项C的意思，故答案为C。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/RqU3777K
本试题收录于： 医学博士外语题库考研分类
0

医学博士外语

考研

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)