In 1961, scientist set up gigantic, sensitive instruments to collect radio waves from the far reaches of space, hoping to discover in them some mathematical pattern indicating that the waves were sent out by other intelligent beings. The first attempt failed, but someday the experiment may succeed.

　　What reason is there to think that we may actually detect intelligent life in outer space？To begin with, modern theories of the development of stars suggest that almost every star has some sort of family of planets. So any star like our own sun （and there are billions of such stars in the universe） is likely to have a planet situated at such a distance that it would receive about the same amount of radiation as the earth.

　　Furthermore, such a planet would probably have the same general composition as our planet; so, allowing a billion years or two or three, there would be a very good chance for life to develop, if current theories of the origin of life are correct.

　　But intelligent life？Life that has reached the stage of being able to send radio waves out into space in a deliberate pattern？Our own planet may have been in existence for five billion years and may have had life on it for two billion, but it is only in the last fifty years that intelligent life capable of sending radio waves into space has lived on earth. From this it might seem that even if there were no technical problems involved, the chance of receiving signals from any particular earth-type planet would be extremely small.

　　This does not mean that intelligent life at our level does not exist somewhere. There are such an unimaginable number of stars that, even at such miserable possibility, it seems certain that there are millions of intelligent life forms scattered through space. The only trouble is, none may be within easy distance of us. Perhaps none ever will be; perhaps the distances that separate us from our fellow “creatures” of this universe will forever remain too great to be conquered. And yet it is conceivable that someday we may come across one of them or, frighteningly, one of them may come across us. What would they be like, these outside-the-earth creatures？

1.What point is the author making by stating that almost every star has some sort of family of planets？

　　A. Sooner or later intelligent beings will be found on one of the stars.

　　B. There must be one or two of the planets on which there are no intelligent beings.

　　C. There are sufficient planets for there to be one that enjoys the same conditions as the earth does.

　　D. One or two billion years later intelligent beings will generate on those planets.

2.What is the main topic of the passage？

　　A. Some probable intelligent life forms on other planets.

　　B. Various stages undergone by the intelligent life on other planets.

　　C. Grounds for probable existence of intelligent life on other planets.

　　D. The possibility of intelligent life existing on our planet.

3.Which of the following can be inferred from the passage？

A. An encounter is probable between people from the earth and intelligent beings from another planet.

B. Though the first attempt failed, scientists did discover the radio waves sent out by other intelligent beings.

C. Other intelligent beings were able to send our radio waves into space well before the last fifty years.

D. It is certain that there are millions of intelligent beings scattered in space but only too far away.

4.According to the author, what is the difference between “we may come across one of them” and “one of them may come across us”？

A. The earth would be dangerously disadvantaged if it is sought after by possibly much more developed creatures.

B. It would prove that there are too many outside-the-earth creatures if “one of them comes across us”.

C. The history of the development of the earth would be proved to be shorter than that of “them” if “they” come across us.

D. it would prove that the distance in between is not so great as we think if “we come across one of them” someday.

For most people, shopping is still a matter of wandering down the street or loading a cart in a shopping mall. Soon, that will change. Electronic commerce is growing fast and will soon bring people more choices. There will, however, be a cost: protecting the consumer from fraud will be harder. Many governments therefore want to extend high street regulations to the electronic world. But politicians would be wiser to see cyberspace as a basis for a new era of corporate self-regulation.

　　Consumers in rich countries have grown used to the idea that the government takes responsibility for everything from the stability of the banks to the safety of the drugs, or their rights to refund when goods are faulty. But governments cannot enforce national laws on businesses whose only presence in their country is on the screen. Other countries have regulators, but the rules of consumer protection differ, as does enforcement. Even where a clear right to compensation exists, the online catalogue customer in Tokyo, say, can hardly go to New York to extract a refund for a dud purchase.

　　One answer is for governments to cooperate more: to recognize each other’s rules. But that requires years of work and volumes of detailed rules. And plenty of countries have rules too fanciful for sober states to accept. There is, however, an alternative. Let the electronic businesses do the “regulation” themselves. They do, after all, have a self-interest in doing so.

　　In electronic commerce, a reputation for honest dealing will be a valuable competitive asset. Governments, too, may compete to be trusted. For instance, customers ordering medicines online may prefer to buy from the United States because they trust the rigorous screening of the Food and Drug Administration; or they may decide that the FDA’s rules are too strict, and buy from Switzerland instead.

Consumers will need to use their judgment. But precisely because the technology is new, electronic shoppers are likely for a while to be a lot more cautious than consumers of the normal sort---and the new technology will also make it easier for them to complain noisily when a company lets them down. In this way, at least, the advent of cyberspace may argue for fewer consumer protection laws, not more.

1.According to the author, what will be the best policy for electronic commerce?

         A．Self – regulation by the business.      B．Strict consumer protection laws.

         C．Close international cooperation.       D．Government protection.

2.In case an electronic shopper bought faulty goods from a foreign country, what could he do?

         A．Refuse to pay for the purchase.        B．Go to the seller and ask for a refund.

         C．Appeal to consumer protection law.          D．Complain about it on the Internet.

3.In the author’s view, businesses would place a high emphasis on honest dealing because in the electronic world         .

         A．international cooperation would be much more frequent

         B．consumers could easily seek government protection

         C．a good reputation is a great advantage in competition

         D．it would be easy for consumers to complain

4.We can infer from the passage that in licensing new drugs the FDA in the United States is    .

         A．very quick  B．very cautious     C．very slow   D．rather careless

5.If a customer buys something that does not meet his expectation, what is the advantage of dealing through electronic commerce over the present normal one?

         A．It will be easier for him to return the goods he is not satisfied with.

         B．It will be easier for him to attain the refund from the seller.

C．It will be easier for him to get his complaints heard by other consumers.

D．It will be easier for him to complain about this to the government.

Dear Economist,
My newly-wedded wife and I are deeply in love. There is, however, one issue that threatens the happiness of our marriage. I absolutely insist on shopping at Walmart. My wife, meanwhile, would rather avoid Walmart at all costs.
　　I have recently tried to convince her that not only does Walmart offer the lowest prices known to man, but that the chain is also a force for good―lower prices mean better standards of living for all consumers, increased global trade means a tighter-knit(紧密团结的) international community, and efficient operations translate into higher productivity growth for the economy. My wife complains about poor labour policies, the “fact” that Walmart squeezes suppliers, and that it puts local shops out of business.
　　Who is right? Will our marriage survive?
　　                                                                                                                                                  Brian Gee
Dear Brian,
I have to agree with you about Walmart. Jason Furman, then an economist at New York University, now an adviser to President Obama, famously argued in 2005 that Walmart was unwittingly (不知不觉地) a progressive success story. The chain’s prices don’t much affect me (I prefer Whole Foods) but Furman estimated that they benefited low-and-middle-income Americans to the sum of around $250 billion a year.
　　Walmart does not pay much, so it may depress wages. Then again, it may increase wages by offering jobs to the otherwise-unemployed. Either way, the benefits of low prices to Walmart shoppers far outweigh any seemingly reasonable costs to Walmart employees. And while it is true that Walmart employees tend to be poor, the same is true of Walmart shoppers.
　　Armed with this information you can face your wife with confidence. You are sure to win the conversation. The divorce is likely to be more argued.
Economist
68. What concerns Brian Gee so much that he wrote the letter?
A. His wife refuses to shop at Walmart.
B. They are faced with a divorce.
C. They can’t afford the costs of shopping at Walmart.
D. They are in conflict about shopping at Walmart. 
69. Brian Gee’s wife tends to hold the opinion that _________.
A. it is wrong for Walmart to depress its employees’ wages
B. consumers’ lives have improved thanks to Walmart
C. Walmart’s business operation increases productivity in economy
D. Walmart’s business increases global trade
70. What can be inferred from the reply letter?
A. Some employees accept the low pay to keep the job.
B. Walmart appeals to only poor consumers and poor employees.
C. Employees suffer from Walmart’s low prices more than consumers.
D. Jason Furman, a New York University economist, spoke highly of Walmart.

　　Trees are useful to man in three very important ways: they provide him with wood and other products, they give him shade, and they help to prevent drought and floods.

　　Unfortunately, in many parts of the world man has not realized that the third of these services is the most important. In his eagerness to draw quick profit from the trees, he has cut them down in large numbers, only to find that without them he has lost the best friends he had.

　　Two thousand years ago a rich and powerful country cut down its trees to build warships, with which to gain itself an empire. It gained the empire but, without its trees, its soil became hard and poor. When the empire fell to pieces, the country found itself faced by floods and starvation.

　　Even though a government realizes the importance of a plentiful supply of trees, it is difficult for it to persuade the villager to see this. The villager wants wood to cook his food with, and he can earn money by making charcoal or selling wood to the townsman. He is usually too lazy or too careless to plant and look after trees. So unless the government has a good system of control, or can educate the people, the forests will slowly disappear.

　　This does not only mean that the villagers? sons and grandsons have fewer trees. The results are even more serious. For where there are trees their roots break the soil up—allowing the rain to sink in and also hold the soil, thus preventing it being washed away easily, but where there are no trees, the soil becomes hard and poor. The rain falls on hard ground and flows away on the surface, causing floods and carrying away with it the rich topsoil, in which crops grow so well. When all the topsoil is gone, nothing remains but a worthless desert.

63. The purpose that the writer wrote this article for is ____ .

　A. to tell people that trees are very useful to man

　B. to warn people not to cut down trees any more

　C. to warn that man mustn't destroy forests any more

　D. to explain how trees help to prevent drought and floods

64. In the writer's opinion, ____ , or the forests slowly disappear.

　A. measure must be taken                      B. people shouldn't draw benefit from the tree

　C. government must realize the serious results      D. unless trees never be cut down

65. According to the article we know it is ____ to prevent the forests from slowly disappearing.

　A. necessary but impossible                    B. necessary but difficult

　C. impossible and unimportant                  D. difficult and impossible

66. In the last two paragraphs the writer wanted to make it clear that ____ .

　A. where there are no trees, the soil becomes hard and poor

　B. where there are many trees, there are fewer floods

　C. where there are no trees, the land might become desert slowly

　D. floods will make the land become desert

　　In 1961, scientist set up gigantic, sensitive instruments to collect radio waves from the far reaches of space, hoping to discover in them some mathematical pattern indicating that the waves were sent out by other intelligent beings. The first attempt failed, but someday the experiment may succeed.
　　What reason is there to think that we may actually detect intelligent life in outer space？To begin with, modern theories of the development of stars suggest that almost every star has some sort of family of planets. So any star like our own sun （and there are billions of such stars in the universe） is likely to have a planet situated at such a distance that it would receive about the same amount of radiation as the earth.
　　Furthermore, such a planet would probably have the same general composition as our planet; so, allowing a billion years or two or three, there would be a very good chance for life to develop, if current theories of the origin of life are correct.
　　But intelligent life？Life that has reached the stage of being able to send radio waves out into space in a deliberate pattern？Our own planet may have been in existence for five billion years and may have had life on it for two billion, but it is only in the last fifty years that intelligent life capable of sending radio waves into space has lived on earth. From this it might seem that even if there were no technical problems involved, the chance of receiving signals from any particular earth-type planet would be extremely small.
　　This does not mean that intelligent life at our level does not exist somewhere. There are such an unimaginable number of stars that, even at such miserable possibility, it seems certain that there are millions of intelligent life forms scattered through space. The only trouble is, none may be within easy distance of us. Perhaps none ever will be; perhaps the distances that separate us from our fellow “creatures” of this universe will forever remain too great to be conquered. And yet it is conceivable that someday we may come across one of them or, frighteningly, one of them may come across us. What would they be like, these outside-the-earth creatures？
1.What point is the author making by stating that almost every star has some sort of family of planets？
　　A. Sooner or later intelligent beings will be found on one of the stars.
　　B. There must be one or two of the planets on which there are no intelligent beings.
　　C. There are sufficient planets for there to be one that enjoys the same conditions as the earth does.
　　D. One or two billion years later intelligent beings will generate on those planets.
2.What is the main topic of the passage？
　　A. Some probable intelligent life forms on other planets.
　　B. Various stages undergone by the intelligent life on other planets.
　　C. Grounds for probable existence of intelligent life on other planets.
　　D. The possibility of intelligent life existing on our planet.
3.Which of the following can be inferred from the passage？
A. An encounter is probable between people from the earth and intelligent beings from another planet.
B. Though the first attempt failed, scientists did discover the radio waves sent out by other intelligent beings.
C. Other intelligent beings were able to send our radio waves into space well before the last fifty years.
D. It is certain that there are millions of intelligent beings scattered in space but only too far away.
4.According to the author, what is the difference between “we may come across one of them” and “one of them may come across us”？
A. The earth would be dangerously disadvantaged if it is sought after by possibly much more developed creatures.
B. It would prove that there are too many outside-the-earth creatures if “one of them comes across us”.
C. The history of the development of the earth would be proved to be shorter than that of “them” if “they” come across us.
D. it would prove that the distance in between is not so great as we think if “we come across one of them” someday.