Major companies are already in pursuit of commercial applications of the new biology. They dream of placing enzymes in the automobile to monitor exhaust and send data on pollution to a microprocessor that will then adjust the engine. They speak of what the New York Times calls metal-hungry microbes that might be used to mine valuable trace metal from ocean water. They have already demanded and won the right to patent new lifeforms.
Nervous critics, including many scientists, worry that there is corporate, national, international, and inter-scientific rivalry in the entire biotechnological field. They create images not of oil spills, but of microbe spills that could spread disease and destroy entire populations. The creation and accidental release of extremely poisonous microbes, however, is only one cause for alarm. Completely rational and respectable scientists are talking about possibilities that stagger the imagination.
Should we breed people with cow-with stomachs so they can digest grass and hay, thereby relieving the food problem by modifying us to eat lower down on the food chain? Should we biologically alter workers to fit the job requirement, for example, creating pilots with faster reaction times or assembly-line workers designed to do our monotonous work for us? Should we attempt to eliminate inferior people and breed a super-race? Should we produce soldiers to do our fighting? Should we use genetic forecasting to pre-eliminate unfit babies? Should we grow reserve organs for ourselves, each of us having, as it were, a savings bank full of spare kidney, livers, or hands?
Wild as these notions may sound, every one has its advocates in the scientific community as well as its striking commercial application. As two critics of genetic engineering, Jeremy Rifkin and Ted Howard, state in their book Who Should Play God? , Broad scale genetic engineering will probably be introduced to America much the same way as assembly lines automobiles, vaccines, computers and all the other technologies. As each new genetic advance becomes commercially practical, a new consumer need will be exploited and a market for the new technology will be created.
1. According to the passage, the exhaust from a car engine could probably be checked by
A) using metal-hungry microbes.
B) making use of enzymes.
C) adjusting the engine.
D) patenting new life forms.
2. According to the passage, which of the following would worry the critics the most?
A) The unanticipated explosion of population.
B) The creation of biological solar cells.
C) The accidental spill of oil.
D) The unexpected release of destructive microbes.
3. Which of the following notions is NOT mentioned?
A) Developing a savings bank of ones organs.
B) Breeding soldiers for a war.
C) Producing people with cow-like stomachs.
D) Using genetic forecasting to cure diseases.
4. According to the passage, Hitler attempted to
A) change the pilots biologically to win the war.
B) develop genetic farming for food supply.
C) kill the people he thought of as inferior.
D) encourage the development of genetic weapons for the war.
5. What does Jeremy Rifkin and Ted Howards statement imply?
A) the commercial applications of genetic engineering are inevitable.
B) America will depend on other countries for biological progress.
C) Americans are proud of their computers, automobiles and genetic technologies.
D) The potential application of each new genetic advance should be controlled.
KEYS: BDDCA
雅思写作:不应过分迷信模板
全面剖析雅思阅读考生备考五大建议
稳扎稳打提高雅思听力成绩四步走
名师雅思阅读之词汇考点分析
专家:“考鸭”一族让暑假复习帮大忙
名师指导:雅思口语“七步曲”
名师指导雅思阅读的五个误解
雅思名师浅谈高分写作语法结构
名师点评:2010年5月30日雅思口语考试真题
利用黄金暑假 突破雅思六分
雅思名师放弃写作模板重视评分标准
不可不知关于雅思词汇五大误解
考官提醒:雅思写作更亲睐开门见山
名师指导高分口语的四大法宝
雅思名师:精读阅读文章 提高写作水平
分享:你不知道的雅思口语24计
考鸭必读:雅思阅读中的“七宗罪”
13个你必须知道的雅思听力原则
名师指导:雅思阅读36计
突破雅思考试之小作文18个锦囊妙计
考鸭必备:雅思口语“两忌”与“两选择”
名师指点:由雅思阅读速度问题想到的
雅思写作最易忽视的六大细节
如何突破雅思阅读段落细节配对题
名师指导:雅思听力高分“四大关注”
备考雅思必知的78个高频词汇
复习加油站:雅思写作70个必备句型
名师解析雅思面试难在哪里
雅思写作高分战略:大作文谋篇制胜
名师剖析2010年5月雅思口语考试趋势
| 不限 |
| 英语教案 |
| 英语课件 |
| 英语试题 |
| 不限 |
| 不限 |
| 上册 |
| 下册 |
| 不限 |