Question

Unless we spend money to spot(认出，发现) and prevent asteroids(小行星) now, one might crash into Earth and destroy life as we know it, say some scientists.

Asteroids are bigger versions of the meteoroids(流星体) that race across the night sky. Most orbit the sun far from Earth and don’t threaten us. But there are also thousands of asteroids whose orbits put them on a collision course with Earth.

But $500 million worth of new telescopes right now, then spend $10 million a year for the next 25 years to locate most of the space rocks. By the time we spot a fatal one, the scientists say, we’ll have a way to change its course.

Is it worth it? Two things experts consider when judging any risk are (i) How likely the event is; (2) How bad the consequences if the event occurs. Experts think an asteroid big enough to destroy lots of life might strike Earth once every 500,000 years. Sounds pretty rare but if one did fall. It would be the end of the world. “If we don’t take care of these bid asteroids, they’ll take care of us,” says one scientist. “it’s that simple.”

The cure, though, might be worse than the disease. Do we really want fleets(舰队，车队) of nuclear weapons sitting around on Earth? “the world has less fear from doomsday(毁灭性) rocks than from a great nuclear fleet set against them.” Said a New York Times article.

1.What does the passage say about asteroids and meteoroids?

A. They are heavenly bodies different in composition.

B. They are heavenly bodies similar in nature.

C. They are more asteroids than meteoroids.

D. Asteroids are more mysterious than meteoroids.

2.What do scientists say about the collision of an asteroid with Earth?

A. It is very unlikely but the danger exists.

B. Such a collision might occur once every 25 years.

C. Collisions of smaller asteroids with Earth occur more often than expected.

D. It’s still too early to say whether such a collision might occur.

3.What do people think of the suggestion of using nuclear weapons to alter the course of asteroids?

A. It sounds practical but it may not solve the problem.

B. It may create more problems than it might solve.

C. It is a waste of money because a collision of asteroids with Earth is very unlikely.

D. Further research should be done before it is proved applicable.

4.We can conclude from the passage that __

A. While pushing asteroids off course nuclear weapons would destroy the world.

B. Asteroids racing across the night sky are likely to hit Earth in the near future.

C. The worry about asteroids can be left to future generations since it is unlikely to happen in our lifetime.

D. Workable solutions still have to be found to prevent a collision of asteroids with Earth.

5.Which of the following best describes the author’s tone in this passage?

A. Optimistic(乐观的)   B.Critical(批评的)  C. Objective(客观的)  D. Arbitrary(武断的)

Answer

1.B

2.A

3.B

4.D

5.C

【解析】

试题分析：本文叙述了小行星和划破夜空的流星是性质一样的物质，只是体积大些。但是小行星撞击地球的可能性每50万年才可能有一次，但一旦发生，将是地球末日。人们现在提出用核武器来改变小行星的轨道，但是现在人们对这个方法担心重重，可行的解决方法仍在寻找之中。

1.B细节理解题。根据文章第二段第一句明确指出“小行星和划破夜空的流星是性质一样的物质，只是体积大些。”解题的关键是对version的理解。故选B。

2.A细节理解题。根据文章倒数第二段对小行星撞击地球的可能性作出了很形象的描述，每50万年才可能有一次，但一旦发生，将是地球末日。故选A。

3.B细节理解题。根据文章最后一段道出了人们的担忧。正如纽约时报的一篇文章所言：“人们对巨石的担心，还不如对用以对付它们的巨型核舰队的担心更甚。故选B。

4.D细节理解题。根据本文虽然提到了用核武器对付小行星的建议，但同时指出人们对这种解决方法担心重重，可见，可行的解决方法仍在寻找之中。故选D。

5.C细节理解题。根据本文在引述观点及例证时，用了不少间接引语或直接引语，说明出处或原述者。可见本文是一篇对事实情况的客观报道。故选C。

考点：科普类短文阅读。