考研英語閱讀理解精讀100篇【社會(huì)文化類】

考研英語閱讀理解精讀100篇unit20
Unit 20
How did a lanky Danish vegetarian who wears T shirts to important meetings and votes only for left-wing politicians become the great Satan of environmentalism? By telling everyone he is an environmentalist but sounding like the opposite. "We are not running out of energy or natural resources," writes Bjorn Lomborg, 37, an associate professor of statistics at Denmark's University of Aarhus and a former member of Greenpeace, in his 1998 book The Skeptical Environmentalist. "Air and water around us are becoming less and less polluted. Mankind's lot has actually improved in terms of practically every measurable indicator."

The book, which was published in English last year, became a best seller, and conservatives worldwide use its ideas to justify inaction on such issues as deforestation and global warming. "We should do something that actually does good and not sounds good," he says of the expense of complying with the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. "For the cost of Kyoto for one year, we could give clean drinking water and sanitation to every human being on earth."

Some scientists say they initially hoped to ignore Lomborg but in the wake of his book's popularity have reacted with a fury rarely seen in academia. Peter Raven, chairman of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, calls Lomborg "the prime example in our time of someone who distorts statistics and statements to meet his own political end." A dozen esteemed environmental scientists, including Raven and Harvard's Edward O. Wilson, are demanding that Lomborg's publisher cut him loose. "We are deeply disturbed that Cambridge University Press would publish and promote an error-filled, poorly referenced and non-peer-reviewed work," they write in a letter calling on Cambridge to transfer publishing rights to a popular, nonscholarly press.

The problem is, Lomborg gets many of his facts right--and provides 2,930 footnotes to make them easy to check. Some scientists and environmental advocates have made exaggerated claims about environmental doom, and it's not surprising that they have finally been catalogued. Yet Lomborg is as guilty of exaggeration and selective use of data as those he criticizes. He is right that air and water quality and agricultural productivity have improved in much of the world. But to look at the data on global warming, biological diversity, marine depletion and deforestation and still say things are generally getting better takes a willful blindness. That's why it's a shame so many of the attacks on Lomborg rely on name calling. All that does is avoid what could be a valuable debate on the substance of environmental policy--and, of course, help Lomborg sell books. "I'm making a fair amount of money from the book," says Lomborg. "A lot more than Cambridge thought."

注（1）：本文選自Time; 12/31/2000, p173；
注（2）：本文習(xí)題命題模仿對(duì)象2004年真題text 4；

1.       Why is Bjorn Lomborg criticized by environmentalists? 

[A] Because he has always been against protecting the environment.
[B] Because he put forward a new hypothesis of protecting the world environment.
[C] Because he claims to be an environmentalist but doubts that environmental problems are as serious as they used to be.
[D] Because he believes that environmental problems are becoming worse.

2.       We can learn from the text that The Skeptical Environmentalist is a book
that__________. 

[A] has attracted attention from both the public and the scholars
[B] has been neglected by the readers since its publication
[C] has been greatly criticized by the readers since its publication
[D]has been greatly praised by the readers since its publication

3.       Conservatives worldwide share with Lomborg the same view that deforestation and
global warming are _______. 

[A] getting worse and worse because nothing has been done about them
[B] getting better and better because much money has been spent on them
[C] serious problems that should be solved at any cost
[D] not serious problems that should be solved at great cost at present

4.       The scientists, according to the text, demand that Cambridge University
Press____________. 

[A] sell all the books to a popular, non-scholarly press, for the book is full of errors.
[B] stop publishing the book and sell the publishing rights to a non-scholarly press, for the book is not an academic book
[C] stop publishing any books written by Lomborg, for he is not accepted by his peers
[D] transfer the publishing rights of the book to another press, for the book is not well referenced

5.       What does the author think of the criticism against Lomborg’s book?

[A] It is fair and has been conducted in a good way.
[B] It prevents Lomborg from getting more money from the book.
[C] It should not be name-calling, but should be carried out in a way that could start a meaningful discussion on how to solve environmental problems.
[D] It is not fair, for the book is well-referenced.

答案：C A D B C

篇章剖析
本篇文章從介紹丹麥大學(xué)奧爾胡斯分校統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)副教授博兆恩•魯姆伯克在《持懷疑態(tài)度的環(huán)抱主義者》一書提出的有關(guān)環(huán)境問題的新觀點(diǎn)入手，介紹了學(xué)術(shù)界的反應(yīng)以及作者的分析。第一段介紹了魯姆伯克的個(gè)人情況及其在《持懷疑態(tài)度的環(huán)抱主義者》一書中提出的新觀點(diǎn)，接著在第二段介紹了其支持者的意見，在第三段給出其反對(duì)者的意見，第四段分析魯姆伯克贏得讀者的原因、其觀點(diǎn)存在的問題，并指出應(yīng)如何正確對(duì)待這本書。

詞匯注釋
dart: [] n. 飛鏢
revile: [] v. 辱罵，斥責(zé)
dogma: [] n. 教條
lanky: [] adj. 瘦長的
Greenpeace  n. （保護(hù)動(dòng)物不遭捕獵等的）“綠色和平”組織
indicator: [] n. 指標(biāo)
justify: [] v. 證明••••••是正當(dāng)?shù)?BR>deforestation: []  n. 采伐森林
comply: [] v. 遵守，順從
Kyoto Protocol 《京都議定書》
sanitation: [] n. 衛(wèi)生設(shè)施
academia: [] n. 學(xué)術(shù)界
American Association for the Advancement of Science: 美國科學(xué)促進(jìn)會(huì)
distort: []v. 歪曲
cut sb. loose （與某人）斷絕關(guān)系
advocate: [] n. 提倡者，鼓吹者
catalogue: [] v 列入
biological diversity 生物多樣性
depletion: [] n. 損耗
willful: [] adj. 故意的

難句突破
But to look at the data on global warming, biological diversity, marine depletion and deforestation and still things are generally getting better takes a willful blindness.
主體句式：to look at the data… takes a willful blindness。
結(jié)構(gòu)分析：該句主語較長，且主語中含有并列和從屬關(guān)系，不容易看清楚句子各成分之間的關(guān)系�！皌o look at the data on global warming, biological diversity, marine depletion and deforestation and still say things are generally getting better”是主語，其中“to look at… and still say…”是并列主語，“things are generally getting better”是say的賓語從句。整個(gè)句子的謂語是takes，賓語是“a willful blindness”。
句子譯文：明明知道全球變暖、生物差異、海洋損耗、森林采伐等環(huán)境問題的數(shù)據(jù)，卻仍然聲稱總的來說環(huán)境問題有好轉(zhuǎn)，這是故意裝著看不見。

題目分析
1．  答案是C，屬推理判斷題。文章第一句話指出Bjorn Lomborg…the great Satan of
environmentalism，可推斷出Bjorn Lomborg遭到環(huán)保主義者的抨擊。接下來第二句“By telling everyone he is an environmentalist but sounding like the opposite. ”回答了為什么他會(huì)遭到抨擊。原來他認(rèn)為環(huán)境問題日益得到好轉(zhuǎn)，不再是人類面臨的大問題。
2．  答案是A，屬推理判斷題。從第二段第一行“The book, which was published in English last
year, became a best seller”可以看出該書吸引了廣大民眾的注意。第三段第一行“Some scientists say they initially hoped to ignore Lomborg but in the wake of his book's popularity have reacted with a fury rarely seen in academia.”進(jìn)而證明該書不僅吸引了普通讀者，也引起了科學(xué)家的注意。
3．  答案是D，屬猜測意義題。文中第二段開頭指出世界各地的保守派用魯姆伯克書中的觀
點(diǎn)為自己在解決森林采伐、全球變暖問題上的不作為辯解。并在引文中說：由此可猜測出保守派和
4．  答案是B，屬于事實(shí)細(xì)節(jié)題。第三段第6—第9行“A dozen esteemed environmental
scientists, including Raven and Harvard's Edward O. Wilson, are demanding that Lomborg's publisher cut him loose. . . they write in a letter calling on Cambridge to transfer publishing rights to a popular, nonscholarly press.”可以說明科學(xué)家們要求劍橋大學(xué)出版社語魯姆伯克斷絕關(guān)系，停止出版、銷售他的書，并將版權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓給非學(xué)術(shù)性出版社。與回答本體相關(guān)的關(guān)鍵詞語有：cut sb. loose 表示“與••••••斷絕關(guān)系”。promote：促銷 nonscholarly：非學(xué)術(shù)性的。
5．  答案是C， 屬推理判斷題。在第四段開頭，作者指出魯姆伯克書中雖然有很多事實(shí)、
引證也顯得很翔實(shí)，但魯姆伯克書中不乏夸張和由選擇地使用資料，而且還故意無視嚴(yán)重的環(huán)境問題，得出環(huán)境問題有好轉(zhuǎn)的結(jié)論。因此，作者認(rèn)為該書很片面。 但接著作者又指出對(duì)魯姆伯克一味的謾罵或斥責(zé)無濟(jì)于事，那樣只會(huì)“avoid what could be a valuable debate on the substance of environmental policy”，應(yīng)該就環(huán)境政策的實(shí)質(zhì)問題展開有意義的討論。由此可推斷作者認(rèn)為應(yīng)該就此書展開討論。

參考譯文:
一個(gè)其貌不揚(yáng)、不拘小節(jié)、政治上極其保守的丹麥素食主義者如何成為環(huán)保主義的大叛逆者？盡管他一直自稱是一名環(huán)保主義者，可在他的論著中他卻大唱反調(diào)�，F(xiàn)年三十七歲的博兆恩•魯姆伯克是丹麥大學(xué)奧爾胡斯分校統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)副教授，曾是“綠色和平”組織成員，在他1998年出版的《持懷疑態(tài)度的環(huán)抱主義者》一書中，他這樣寫道 “我們并沒有面臨能源和自然資源短缺的問題。我們周圍的空氣和水越來越潔凈，事實(shí)上，幾乎所有的測量指標(biāo)都表明人類的命運(yùn)已經(jīng)得到改善�！�

這本書的英譯本去年一出版，就成為暢銷書。世界各地的保守份子紛紛用書中的觀點(diǎn)為自己在森林采伐和全球變暖等問題上的不作為作辯解。談到遵循有關(guān)全球變暖的《京都議定書》的費(fèi)用時(shí)，博兆恩•魯姆伯克這樣寫道：“我們應(yīng)該注重實(shí)效性，而不要一味追求表面效應(yīng)，”“執(zhí)行《京都議定書》一年的費(fèi)用可以為地球上所有的人口提供潔凈的飲用水和衛(wèi)生設(shè)施。”

一些科學(xué)家說起初他們不想理睬魯姆伯克的言論，可是隨著《持懷疑態(tài)度的環(huán)保主義者》一書的不斷升溫，他們憤怒回?fù)�，其憤怒程度在學(xué)術(shù)界實(shí)數(shù)罕見。美國科學(xué)促進(jìn)會(huì)主席彼得•瑞文就此發(fā)表評(píng)論時(shí)說：“在我們這個(gè)時(shí)代，一些人為達(dá)個(gè)人政治目的而歪曲統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字和綜述，魯姆伯克就是最好的例子。”十多位德高望重的環(huán)境科學(xué)家，包括瑞文以及哈佛大學(xué)的愛德華•奧•威爾森要求魯姆伯克的出版發(fā)行方劍橋大學(xué)出版社與他解除合作關(guān)系。他們聯(lián)名寫信給出版社說：“劍橋大學(xué)出版社出版發(fā)行這樣一本錯(cuò)誤百出、引證不詳、未經(jīng)同行評(píng)論過的作品，我們深感不安。”他們呼吁劍橋大學(xué)出版社將該書版權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓給一家通俗的、非學(xué)術(shù)性的出版社。

問題是魯姆伯克書中包含大量事實(shí)，而且他還列出了2930條腳注，以方便讀者查證。一些科學(xué)家和環(huán)保人士在他們的著說中確實(shí)夸大了環(huán)保問題的嚴(yán)重性，難怪他們都被列在其中。然而魯姆伯克正像他所抨擊的那些人一樣，也存在夸大事實(shí)、有選擇性地使用數(shù)據(jù)等問題。在世界的大多數(shù)地區(qū)，空氣質(zhì)量和水的質(zhì)量已得到改善，農(nóng)業(yè)產(chǎn)量有提高，在這一點(diǎn)上，魯姆伯克是正確的。可是魯姆伯克故意無視全球變暖、生物多樣性、海洋損耗、森林采伐等方面的資料，仍然聲稱總的來說環(huán)境問題有所好轉(zhuǎn)。非常遺憾，針對(duì)魯姆伯克的攻擊多半是人身攻擊。這些漫罵不但妨礙人們就環(huán)境政策的實(shí)質(zhì)問題展開有價(jià)值的爭論，而且客觀上幫魯姆伯克賣書。魯姆伯克說：“我從這本書上賺了一大筆錢，比劍橋預(yù)計(jì)得多得多。”

二：資料下載

更多資料請?jiān)L問：考試吧考研欄目