Development of a widely accepted chronology for the arrival of humans has been equally difficult, and it was only with the development of optically stimulated luminescence dating that a human presence in Australia was confirmed at 53,000 to 60,000 years ago. Older dates for a human presence in Australia have now been shown to be erroneous .
The importance of Australia as a separate natural laboratory in which to test extinction theories lies in the fact that humans arrived there much earlier than they arrived in the other continental areas (the Americas and northern Eurasia) that experienced substantial megafaunal extinction. What Miller et al. have shown is that the extinction of Genyornis occurred simultaneously across southeastern Australia (indeed probably right across the continent) about 50,000 years ago. This is very close to the presently accepted time of arrival of humans in Australia. It was also a period of modest climate change, well before the dramatic climatic fluctuations of the terminal Pleistocene. The data of Miller et al., therefore, support those who see human hunting rather than climate as causing the extinction of the megafauna.
Genyornis was a ponderous bird, around 80 to 100 kg in weight, about twice as heavy as the living emu and cassowary. It was an inhabitant of Australias inland plains and some coastal regions, but its legs were relatively short and thick, suggestion that it was a slower runner than the emu. Proponents of humancaused extinction suggest that it is just such characteristics that made the megafauna vulnerable to human hunting.
A new school of thought has recently established itself in the extinction debate. It advocates the idea that a combination of human impact and climate change was responsible for the extinction of the worlds megafauna. The new Genyornis data also weaken that argument, for the following reason. Fifty thousand years ago, Australia was experiencing mild cooling; 11,000 to 12,000 years ago, the Americas were experiencing rapid warming. These disparate climatic conditions, all coincident with megafaunal extinction, suggest that whatever was happening with climate, it was bad for the big animals. Under these conditions, the hybrid model becomes indistinguishable from the humancaused extinction model for the influence of climate becomes extremely weak, and only the arrival of humans is important in predicting extinction.
1. The last word “megafauna” in Paragraph 2 most probably means
A birds. B plants.
C big animals. D small animals.
2. Genyornis was vulnerable to human hunting because it was
A a delicacy. B very weak.
C very small in size. D clumsy.
3. How many models have been put forward for the extinction of Genyoris?
A One. B Two.
C Three. D Four.
4. That Australia experienced mild cooling and the Americas rapid warming suggests that
A the climatic conditions were unfit for Genyornis to live.
B Genyornis were highly adaptable to different climatic conditions.
C The two climatic conditions were both bad for Genyornis.
D The climatic conditions had nothing to do with the extinction of Genyoris.
5. The selection is mainly about
A the debate over the time of the human presence in Australia.
B the relationship between the human presence and magafaunal extinction.
C the relationship between human activities and climatic changes.
D the debate over factors causing megafaunal extinction.
It was Saturday. As always, it was a busy one, for “Six days shall you labor and do all your work” was taken seriously back then. Outside, Father and Mr. Patrick next door were busy chopping firewood. Inside their own houses, Mother and Mrs. Patrick were engaged in spring cleaning.
Somehow the boys had slipped away to the back lot with their kites. Now, even at the risk of having Brother caught to beat carpets , they had sent him to the kitchen for string(线). It seemed there was no limit to the heights to which kites would fly today.
My mother looked at the sitting room, its furniture disordered for a thorough sweeping, A gun she cast a look toward the window. “Come on, girls! Let’s take string to the boys and watch them
On the way we met Mrs. Patrick, laughing guiltily as if she were doing something wrong, together with her girls.
There never was such a day for flying kited! We played all our fresh string into the boys’ kites and they went up higher and higher .We could hardly distinguish the orange-colored spots of the kites. Now and then we slowly pulled one kite back, watching it dancing up and down it the wind, and finally bringing it down to earth, just for the joy of sending it up again.
Even our fathers dropped their tools and joined us. Our mothers took their turn, laughing like schoolgirls. I think we were all beside ourselves. Parents forgot their duty and their dignity; children forgot their everyday fights and little jealousies. “Perhaps it’s like this in the kingdom of heaven,” I thought confusedly.
It was growing dark before we all walked sleepily back to house. I suppose we had some sort of supper. I suppose there must have been a surface tidying-up, for the house on Sunday looked clean and orderly enough. The strange thing was, we didn't mention that day afterward. I felt a little embarrassed .Surely none of the others had been as excited as I. I locked the memory up in that deepest part of me where we keep “the things that cannot be and yet they are.”
The years went on, then one day I was hurrying about my kitchen in a city apartment, trying to get some work out of the way while my three-year-old insistently cried her desire to “go park ,see duck.”
“I can’t go!” I said. “I have this and this to do, and when I’m through I’ll be too tired to walk that for.”
My mother , who was visiting us , looked up from the peas she was shelling ,“It’s a wonderful day,” she offered，“Really warm , yet there’s a fine breezy . Do you remember that day we flew kites?”
I stopped in my dash between stove and sink. The looked door flew open and with it a rush of memories. “Come on.” I told my little girl. “You’re right, it’s too good a day to miss.”
Another decade passed. We were in the aftermath (余波)of a great war. All
evening we had been asking our returned soldier, the youngest Patrick Boy, about his experiences as a prisoner of war. He had talked freely, but now for a long time he had been silent. What was he thinking of – what dark and horrible things?
“Say!” A smile slipped out from his lips. “Do you remember --- no, of course you wouldn’t. It probably didn’t make the impression on you as it did on me.”
I hardly dared speak. “Remember what?”
“I used to think of that day a lot in POW camp(战俘营), when things weren’t too good. Do you remember the day we flew the kites?”
1. Mrs. Patrick was laughing guiltily because she thought .
A. she was too old to fly kites
B. her husband would make fun of her
C. she should have been doing her housework then
D. her girls weren’t supposed to play the boy’s game
2. By” we were all beside ourselves”, the writer means that they all .
A. felt confused B. went wild with joy
C. looked on D. forgot their fights
3. What did the writer think after the kite-flying?
A. The boys must have had more fun than the girls.
B. They should have finished their work before playing.
C. Her parents should spend more time with them.
D. All the others must have forgotten that day.
4. Why did the writer finally agree to take her little girl for an outing?
A. She suddenly remembered her duty as a mother.
B. She was reminded of the day they flew kites.
C. She had finished her work in the kitchen.
D. She thought it was a great day to play outside.
5. The youngest Patrick Boy is mentioned to show that _____ .
A. the writer was not alone in treasuring her fond memories
B. his experience in POW camp threw a shadow over his life
C. childhood friendship means so much to the writer
D. people like him really changed a lot after the war
In 1935, the clarinetist and bandleader Benny Goodman, aged just twentysix, left New York with his fourteenpiece “swing” band and, traveling in a ragtag group of cars, headed for the huge Palomar Ballroom in Los Angeles. It was not an easy trip. There were half a dozen dismal, sparsely attended onenighters and three weeks at a dance hall in Denver, where the band was forced to play waltzes, tangos, and novelty numbers. On the opening night at the Palomar, the band played ballad numbers in the first set, and there was little response from the dancers. Then one of the musicians said, if they were going to bomb again they might well do it in style. So Goodman called for his hot, often uptempo arrangements, many of them by the ingenious black bandleader and arranger Fletcher Henderson, and the kids stopped dancing, clustered around the bandstand, and began roaring. Before the weeks at the Palomar were over, it was clear that Goodman had suddenly made jazz—still a suspect and largely subliminal American folk music, despite the brilliant inventions during the previous decade of Jelly Roll Morton and others—into a popular music.
Goodmans surprising ways continued. In 1936, he shook up the white entertainment establishment by hiring two black musicians—the elegant pianist Teddy Wilson and the plunging vibraphonist Lione Hampton. (To be sure, Wilson and Hampton did not play in the band; instead, they appeared with Goodman and the drummer Gene Krupa during intermissions.) A year later, when the band went into the Paramount Theater in New York for three weeks, legions of kids appeared, and a screaming, dancing riot nearly took place. It was the first great American show frenzy, and it prepared the way for the Sinatra frenzy of 1947, and for all the Beatles frenzies, and for all the mindless rockborne frenzies of the Seventies and Eighties.
Then, on the night of January 16, 1938, Goodman, challenging the longhairs, took his band into a soldout Carnegie Hall. The big band played a dozen numbers, the trio two numbers, and the quartet five numbers. Despite the immediate rumblings from Olin Downes, the Timess classical music critic (“The playing last night, if noise, speed and beat, all old devices, are heat, was “hot” as it could be, but nothing came of it all, and in the long run it was decidedly monotonous”), Goodmans concert moved jazz even further up the American popular register. ［412 words］
1. This passage is mainly
A a general review of Jazz music.
B a biography of Benny Goodman.
C about the origin of American folk music.
D about how jazz became popular in America.
2. Which of the following statements is true according to the passage?
A The bands first music show in Los Angles was an immediate success.
B Goodman is considered the father of Jazz music.
C Benny Goodman was unknown to public when he left New York.
D The band scheduled to play waltzes, tangos and novelty numbers at a dance hall in Denver.
3. It could be inferred from the passage that
A Jazz is a style of music native to America.
B Classic music had become outdated at Goodmans time.
C Morton and Goodman were contemporaries.
D Goodman was the first bandleader who hired Black musicians in 1930s.
4. The phrase “shake up” (Line 1,Paragraph 2) in the context probably means
A to give a very unpleasant shock.
B to make changes to an organization.
B to get rid of a problem.
D to point out, designate.
5. Towards Goodmans music show frenzy, Olin Downes, the classical music critic has
A approving attitude. B satirizing attitude.
C regretting mind. D exaggerated tone.
In the fall of 1985. I was a bright-eyed girl heading off to Howard University, aiming at a legal career and dreaming of sitting on a Supreme Court bench somewhere. Twenty-one years later I am later I am still a bright-eyed dreamer and one with quite a different tale to tell.
My grandma, an amazing woman, graduated from college an the age of 65. She was the first in our family to reach that goal. But one year after I started college, she developed cancer. I made the choice to withdraw from college to care for her. It meant that school and my personal dream would have to wait.
Then I got married with another dream: building my family with a combination of adopt and biological children. In 1999, we adopted our first son. To lay eyes on him was fantastic---and very emotional. A year later came our second adopted boy. Then followed son No. 3. In 2003, I gave birth to another boy.
You can imagine how fully occupied I became, raising four boys under the age of 81. Our home was a complete zoo---a joyous zoo. Not surprising, I never did make it back to college full-time. But I never gave up on the dream either. I had only one choice: to find a way. That meant talking as few as one class each semester.
The hardest part was feeling guilty about the time I spent away from the boys. They often wanted me to stay home with them. There certainly were times I wanted to quit, But I knew I should set an example for them to follow through the rest of their lives.
In 2007, I graduated from the University of North Carolina. It took me over 21 years to get my college degree！
I am not special, just single-minded. It always struck me that when you’re looking at a big challenge from the outside it looks huge, but when you’re in the midst of it, it just seems normal. Everything you want won’t arrive in your life on one day. It’s a process. Remember；little steps add up to big dreams.
1. When the author went to Howard University, her dream was tobe
A. a writer
B. a teacher
C. a judge
D. a doctor
2.. Why did the author quit school in her second year of college?
A. She wanted to study by herself.
B. She fell in love and got married.
C. She suffered from a serious illness.
D. She decided to look after her grandma.
3. What can we learn about the author from Paragraphs 4 and 5?
She was busy yet happy with her family life.
She ignored her guilty feeling for her sons.
She wanted to remain a full-time housewife.
She was too confused to make a correct choice.
4. What dose the author mostly want to tell us in the last paragraph?
Failure is the mother of success.
Little by little, one goes far.
Every coin has two sides.
Well begun, half done.
5. Which of the following can best describe the author?
Caring and determine.
Honest and responsible.
Ambitious and sensitive.
Innocent and single-minded.
A few common misconceptions. Beauty is only skin-deep. One' s physical assets and liabilities don' t count all that much in a managerial career. A woman should always try to look her best.
Over the last 30 years, social scientists have conducted more than 1,000 studies of how we react to beautiful and not- so-beautiful people. The virtually unanimous conclusion: Looks do matter, more than most of us realize. The data suggest, for example, the physically attractive individuals are more likely to be treated well by their parents, sought out as friends, and pursued romantically. With the possible exception of women seeking managerial jobs they are also more likely to be hired, paid well, and promoted.
Un-American, you say, unfair and extremely unbelievable? Once again, the scientists have caught us mouthing pieties (虔诚) while acting just the contrary. Their typical experiment works something like this. They give each member of a group--college students, perhaps, or teachers or corporate personnel managers a piece of paper relating an individual' s accomplishments. Attached to the paper is a photograph. While the papers all say exactly the same thing the pictures are different. Some show a strikingly attractive person, some an average-looking character, and some an unusually unattractive human being. Group members are asked to rate the individual on certain attributes, anything from personal warmth to the likelihood that he or she will be promoted.
Almost invariably, the better looking the person in the picture, the higher the person is rated. In the phrase, borrowed from Sappho, that the social scientists use to sum up the common perception, what is beautiful is good.
In business, however, good looks cut both ways for women, and deeper than for men. A Utah State University professor, who is an authority on the subject, explains: In terms of their careers, the impact of physical attractiveness on males is only modest. But its potential impact on females can be tremendous, making it easier, for example, for the more attractive to get jobs where they are in the public eye. on another note, though, there is enough literature now for us to conclude that attractive women who aspire (追求) to managerial positions do not get on as well as who may be less attractive.
1. In "Beauty is only skin-deep", "skin-deep" can be replaced by______.
A. decorating B. superficial C. expressive D. demanding
2. "One's physical assets and liabilities don' t count all that much in a managerial career."(paral) can be interpretated as______.
A. whether or not one looks good or bad, it doesn' t affect much one' s managerial career
B. in one' s managerial career, he may deal with cases like assets and liabilities
C. in one' s managerial career, he may rarely deal with cases like assets and liabilities
D. whether or not one looks good or bad, it may affect much one' s managerial career
3. The result of research carried out by social scientists show that______.
A. people do not realize the importance of looking one' s best
B. women in pursuit of managerial jobs are not likely to be paid well
C. good -looking women aspire to managerial positions
D. attractive people generally have an advantage over those who are not
4. "Good looks cut both ways for women" (Para.5) means that______.
A. attractive women have tremendous potential impact on public job
B. good-looking women always get the best of everything
C. being attractive is not always an advantage for women
D. attractive women do not do as well as unattractive women in managerial positions
5. It can be inferred from the passage that in the business world______.
A. handsome men are not affected as much by their looks as attractive women are
B. physically attractive women who are in the public eye usually do quite well
C. physically attractive men and women who are in the public eye usually get along quite well
D. good looks are important for women as they are for men
A few common misconceptions. Beauty is only skin-deep. One' s physical assets and liabilities don' t count all that much in a managerial career. A woman should always try to look her best.
Over the last 30 years, social scientists have conducted more than 1,000 studies of how we react to beautiful and not- so-beautiful people. The virtually unanimous conclusion: Looks do matter, more than most of us realize. The data suggest, for example, the physically attractive individuals are more likely to be treated well by their parents, sought out as friends, and pursued romantically. With the possible exception of women seeking managerial jobs they are also more likely to be hired, paid well, and promoted.
Un-American, you say, unfair and extremely unbelievable? Once again, the scientists have caught us mouthing pieties (虔诚) while acting just the contrary. Their typical experiment works something like this. They give each member of a group--college students, perhaps, or teachers or corporate personnel managers a piece of paper relating an individual' s accomplishments. Attached to the paper is a photograph. While the papers all say exactly the same thing the pictures are different. Some show a strikingly attractive person, some an average-looking character, and some an unusually unattractive human being. Group members are asked to rate the individual on certain attributes, anything from personal warmth to the likelihood that he or she will be promoted.
Almost invariably, the better looking the person in the picture, the higher the person is rated. In the phrase, borrowed from Sappho, that the social scientists use to sum up the common perception, what is beautiful is good.
In business, however, good looks cut both ways for women, and deeper than for men. A Utah State University professor, who is an authority on the subject, explains: In terms of their careers, the impact of physical attractiveness on males is only modest. But its potential impact on females can be tremendous, making it easier, for example, for the more attractive to get jobs where they are in the public eye. on another note, though, there is enough literature now for us to conclude that attractive women who aspire (追求) to managerial positions do not get on as well as who may be less attractive.
1. In "Beauty is only skin-deep", "skin-deep" can be replaced by______.
A. decorating B. superficial C. expressive D. demanding
2. "One's physical assets and liabilities don' t count all that much in a managerial career."(paral) can be interpretated as______.
A. whether or not one looks good or bad, it doesn' t affect much one' s managerial career
B. in one' s managerial career, he may deal with cases like assets and liabilities
C. in one' s managerial career, he may rarely deal with cases like assets and liabilities
D. whether or not one looks good or bad, it may affect much one' s managerial career
3. The result of research carried out by social scientists show that______.
A. people do not realize the importance of looking one' s best
B. women in pursuit of managerial jobs are not likely to be paid well
C. good -looking women aspire to managerial positions
D. attractive people generally have an advantage over those who are not
4. "Good looks cut both ways for women" (Para.5) means that______.
A. attractive women have tremendous potential impact on public job
B. good-looking women always get the best of everything
C. being attractive is not always an advantage for women
D. attractive women do not do as well as unattractive women in managerial positions
5. It can be inferred from the passage that in the business world______.
A. handsome men are not affected as much by their looks as attractive women are
B. physically attractive women who are in the public eye usually do quite well
C. physically attractive men and women who are in the public eye usually get along quite well
D. good looks are important for women as they are for men
