备考2021年高考英语一轮复习32：议论文类阅读理解

    After years of observing human nature, I have decided that two qualities make the difference between men of great achievement and men of average performance curiosity and discontent. I have never known an outstanding man who lacked either. And I have never known an average man who had both. The two belong together.

    Together, these deep human urges (驱策力) count for much more that ambition. Galileo was not merely ambitious when he dropped objects of varying weights from the Leaning Tower at Pisa and timed their fall to the ground. Like Galileo, all the great names in history were curious and asked in discontent, "Why? Why? Why?"

Fortunately, curiosity and discontent don't have to be learned. We are born with them and need only recapture them.

    "The great man," said Mencius (孟子), "is he who does not lose his child's heart." Yet most of us do lose it. We stop asking questions. We stop challenging custom. We just follow the crowd. And the crowd desires restful average. It encourages us to occupy our own little corner, to avoid foolish leaps into the dark, to be satisfied.

    Most of us meet new people, and new ideas, with hesitation. But once having met and liked them, we think how terrible it would have been, had we missed the chance. We will probably have to force ourselves to waken our curiosity and discontent and keep them awake.

    How should you start? Modestly, so as not to become discouraged. I think of one friend who couldn't arrange flowers to satisfy herself. She was curious about how the experts did it. How she is one of the experts, writing books on flower arrangement.

    One way to begin is to answer your own excuses. You haven't any special ability? Most people don't; there are only a few geniuses. You haven't any time? That's good  because it's always the people with no time who get things done. Harriet Stowe, mother of six, wrote parts of Uncle Tom's Cabin while cooking. You're too old? Remember that Thomas Costain was 57 when he published his first novel, and that Grandma Moses showed her first pictures when she was 78.

    However you start, remember there is no better time to start than right now, for you'll never be more alive than you are at this moment.

    Every year, more books on happiness are published. And every year, more people feel depressed because they do not see themselves as happy. They don't remember or know what it feels like, and instead, they feel guilty that they aren't as happy as everyone says they should be. This is really a sad state of emotional affairs.

    The books, blogs, YouTube videos and advice columns (专栏) will tell you that if you read, exercise, stay busy, help others, and increase your intimacy (亲密) every day, then you too can be happy.

    The simple truth is that no one can be happy all the time. That doesn't mean you have to be sad, angry, or depressed the rest of the time but that you can find a middle ground called contentment. This middle ground is a good place mentally and emotionally, and spending time there is a healthy choice.

    Contentment is somewhere between satisfied and peaceful. When you are in that place, the stuff of life can be going on around you, but you don't need to allow it to bother you. And that, my friends, is a very nice way to go through life.

    I find contentment in walks and in writing, and in talking with my partner and reminding each other that our life is good, despite temporary setbacks or scary moments. Because I know about myself and I can respond differently. Doing this takes away stress and will keep you from losing your state of contentment.

    If there is even one thing that puts you in a state of contentment — you do it regularly and early enough each day — it will help you go through any challenges you may have to face later.

    Right at this moment, things around me are still a little out of my control — such is life — but I am feeling pretty good because I actively living my purpose. I am now content, and that feeling will last the whole day through. You can do the same.

    Being stuck behind crowds of slow walkers when you're in a hurry is one of the most annoying things. But now, Lakeside Shopping Centre in Essex, one of the UK's largest shopping malls, has introduced its very own fast lane (通道) for shoppers in a hurry, aiming to help impatient shoppers avoid slow walkers and the anger that goes with them.

    The Lakeside Shopping Center in Essex has introduced a 720-foot "fast lane" reserved for fast walkers only, just in time for the Christmas rush. The Center's management team said, "The lane will help the shoppers who know where they want to go quickly and don't want to get caught in behind unhurried shoppers at the busiest time of the year."

    The fast lane was introduced after a MasterCard survey found that 80 percent of consumers found slow walkers their biggest annoyance while shopping. The research also found that the average walking speed slowed down by 21 percent during the Christmas shopping period, as most shoppers spent more time window shopping during this period.

    Gary Mortimer, an expert from the Queensland University of Technology, said he wasn't surprised by the promotion about the launch of the fast lane, and thought the concept would appeal to shoppers all over the world. "Crowded parking lots and busy shopping centers tend to be two of the biggest complaints of shoppers over the festive season," he said. “I think the fast lanes are a new approach. However, I suspect it will be a bit like fast lanes on the highway, so it might end up being more trouble than its worth.

    The MasterCard survey also identified the four most common types of shoppers. They include "Skaters" who try and make their way through crowds politely, "Dodgers" who move down the paths to avoid slow walkers, "Bulldozers" who push their way through crowds, and "Tutters" who express their frustrations to slow walkers.

    In an ideal world, we might be able to live free from discrimination. But not this one, in which we are constantly dividing everything into "us" and "them".

    This is especially true during times of fear, like now, when the novel coronavirus is spreading across China and the world. It's a time when "us" means safe and clean while “them" means infectious and risky. Or at least we'd like to believe so.

    But this is actually a misbelief, which has been fueled and promoted by fear, and sadly, the media. When the outbreak first started, the term "Wuhan virus" was used in some news, creating hostility (敌意) toward people from Wuhan and Hubei as a whole. There were reports of hotels refusing to accept guests from Hubei and some hospitals denied their entry even when they needed treatment for other medical problems.

    Elsewhere in the world, German magazine Der Spiegel labeled the virus on its cover as "Made in China". Australia's Herald Sun, meanwhile, printed, "China Kids Stay Home" on its front page, implying that all kids from China are carriers of the virus. It's also reported that Chinese people overseas have faced harassment (骚扰) and even violence.

    This kind of misbelief is exactly why and when the World Health Organization (WHO) was trying to come up with a name for the disease, it had to be careful. "We had to find a name that did not refer to a geographical (地理的) location, an animal, an individual or group of people," said Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the WHO, on Feb 11. And COVID-19 was the final decision.

    World leaders and institutes are also sharing sensible voices. "There is no place in our country for discrimination driven by fear or misinformation," Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said at a Lunar New Year celebration in Toronto on Feb 2. Cornell University also sent an email to students and faculty, saying, "We need to remember to care for one another and not make assumptions about other's symptoms or any characteristics of identity."

    It's understandable that during times like this, we want to go to extreme lengths to make sure we're safe. But fear is never part of the cure. Only love and independent thinking takes you further.

    “New and improved. “These words are put in so many marketing campaigns that we tend to accept them as linked. But many new drugs aren't an improvement over the best existing drug for a given condition, and the fast drug-approval processes in recent years have added to the uncertainty about their advantages.

    A recent report in the British Medical Journal, “New Drugs: Where Did We Go Wrong and What Can We Do Better? “Analyzed the issue. The authors looked at 216 drugs approved between 2011 and 2017:152 were newly developed, and 64 were existing medicine approved for new uses. Only 25%offered a major advantage over the established treatment, and fully 58%had no confirmed added benefit to reduce symptoms or improve health-related quality of life.

    “This doesn't mean there's no added benefit, “lead author Wissler said. “It just means we have no positive proof. Either we have no studies or have studies not good enough. “Wissler and her co-authors work for a German institute which evaluates new treatments and advises on whether the country's health care system should pay a premium(补贴)for them. Such organizations, known as health technology assessment(HTA)agencies, work a little differently in the US, says Sean Tunisia researcher in Baltimore: “If payers think a new drug isn't better than an existing drug, these agencies will require that hospitals try the cheaper drug first.”

    Germanys HTA demands trials to prove that a new treatment beats the existing standard. This isn't always practical. For one thing, such studies can be expensive and time-consuming, with no guarantee of success. Secondly, it can discourage companies from attempting to develop new alternatives. This is already happening. Drug developers are increasingly focused on areas where there are no good treatments to compete with, such as rare diseases.

    This lack of meaningful data to guide patients is a major point of Wissler's paper. With accelerated approval, there are more products approved, with a greater amount of uncertainty about risks and benefits. But there are other solutions besides drug trials. One idea is to require postmarked studies to track the effectiveness of newly approved drugs—a step too often neglected.

    Do you like shopping? For shopaholics in the UK, the place to head to used to be the “high street”. It was the place where you could find familiar fashion brands and essential everyday items in the centre of a town. But change in our shopping habits has taken its toll on the British high street.

    News about shops losing money and shutting is now common. Some city-centre department stores have closed and even long-established retailers (零售商) have reported profit slumps. According to a recent survey, a record 2,481 shops disappeared from UK high streets last year — up by 40 percent.

    As the BBC's Emma Simpson writes, things have become a lot harder for traditional retailers in recent years. They have faced rising costs from wages, business rates and the requirement to introduce Europe's new data law. But the biggest threat has come from online shopping. She says “Consumers now spend one in every five pounds online — and if businesses are seeing 20 percent fewer sales on the shop floor, as well as their fixed costs rising, then profit margins will be squeezed.”

    While some of us like to window shop — browsing for things to buy, only to purchase them online at a discount — the fact is that, overall, shoppers are making fewer visits to high streets. Eventually, town centres could become like ghost towns. If people aren't out and about shopping, they won't use other services, like cafes, restaurants and cinemas, which leads to job losses. The high street has also suffered from the arrival of big shopping malls, which offer a retail experience under one roof, with free parking, away from the bad weather!

    Meanwhile, back on the high street, some shops still exist. Analysts have said it's those that have moved away from traditional retailing that are surviving. These include beauty salons, nail bars and independent coffee shops — but are these kinds of shops enough to keep the British high street open for business?

    In 1926, US automaker Henry Ford shortened its employees' workweek from six eight-hour days to five, with no pay cuts. It's something workers and labor unions had been calling for. Ford wasn't responding to worker demands； he was being a businessman. He expected increased productivity and knew workers with more time and money would buy and use the products they were making.  It was a way of encouraging consumerism and productivity to increase profits, and it succeeded.

    Since standardization of the 40-hour workweek in the mid-20th century, everything has changed but the hours. If anything, many people are working even longer hours, especially in North America. This has a severe influence on human health and well-being, as well as the environment. Until the Second World War, it was common for one person in a family, usually the oldest male, to work full-time. Now, women make up 42 percent of the world's full-time workforce. Technology has made a lot of work unnecessary, with computers and robots doing many tasks previously performed by humans.

    Well into the 21st century, we continue to work the same long hours as 20th century laborers, using up ever more of Earth's supply to produce more goods that we must keep working to buy, use and replace in a seemingly endless cycle of hard work and consumption. It's time to pause and consider better ways to live like shifting from fossil-fueled lifestyles with which our consumer-based workweeks are connected.

    The UK think tank, New Economics （经济学）Foundation, argues that a standard 21-hour workweek would address a number of interconnected problems： "overwork, unemployment, over-consumption, high carbon emissions, low well-being, and the lack of time to live sustainably, to care for each other, and simply to enjoy life".

Economic systems that require constant growth on a finite （有限的）planet don't make sense. It's time for a change in our economic thinking.

    Do some kinds of video games cause violence? Scientific studies do not suggest a link. But the idea that there is a link between violent video games and violent acts reappeared following the mass shooting in El Paso, Texas, last weekend. An online statement thought to be written by the El Paso gunman mentioned the video game "Call of Duty".

    On Monday, President Donald Trump said that" terrifying video games” contribute to a "glorification of violence''. American politicians have long made similar statements・ Benjamin Burroughs is a professor of media at the University of Las Vegas. He said that there is no linkage to gun violence, when mentioning video games. Burroughs pointed out that some studies show a short-term increase in aggressive thoughts and feelings after playing video games, but nothing that rises to the level of violence. "Plenty of gamers get upset when they lose or feel the game was 'cheating', but it doesn't lead to violent outputs," Burroughs stressed.

    In 2006, a small study by researchers at Indiana University found that teenagers who played violent video games showed higher levels of emotional arousal (激发) —strong emotions like anger or fear. The teenagers also showed less activity in the parts of the brain associated with the ability to plan, control and direct thoughts and behavior.

    Patrick Markey, the psychology professor, found in his research that men who commit severe acts of violence actually play violent video games less than the average male. Another study by Markey and other researchers showed that violence tends to go down when a new violent movie or video game comes out. One possible explanation is that people are at home playing the game or in theaters watching the movie. Markey believes that video games might excite people, but they do not change who people are. "It is like going to see a sad movie," Markey said of playing video games. "It might make you cry but it doesn't make you clinically depressed," he said.

    Many people think that listening is a passive business. It is just the opposite. Listening well is an active exercise of our attention and hard work. It is because they do not realize this, or because they are not willing to do the work, that most people do not listen well.

    Listening well also requires total concentration upon someone else. An essential part of listening well is the rule known as ‘bracketing'. Bracketing includes the temporary giving up or setting aside of your own prejudices and desires, to experience as far as possible someone else's world from the inside, stepping into his or her shoes. Moreover, since listening well involves bracketing, it also involves a temporary acceptance of the other person. Sensing this acceptance, the speaker will seem quite willing to open up the inner part of his or her mind to the listener. True communication is under way and the energy required for listening well is so great that it can be accomplished only by the will to extend oneself for mutual growth.

    Most of the time we lack this energy. Even though we may feel in our business dealings or social relationships that we are listening well, what we are usually doing is listening selectively. Often we have a prepared list in mind and wonder, as we listen, how we can achieve certain desired results to get the conversation over as quickly as possible or redirected in ways more satisfactory to us. Many of us are far more interested in talking than in listening, or we simply refuse to listen to what we don't want to hear.

    It wasn't until toward the end of my doctor career that I have found the knowledge that one is being truly listened to is frequently therapeutic (有疗效的). In about a quarter of the patients I saw, surprising improvement was shown during the first few months of psychotherapy (心理疗法), before any of the roots of problems had been uncovered or explained. There are several reasons for this phenomenon, but chief among them, I believe, was the patient's sense that he or she was being truly listened to, often for the first time in years, and for some, perhaps for the first time ever.

    For famous photojournalist Sir Don McCullin, the landscape has changed since the days when dozens of printed pages were devoted to his photo stories, leading him to declare, "Photojournalism is dying." According to Sir Don McCullin, newspapers and magazines are much more interested in the wealthy, the glamorous and celebrities. They don't want suffering people in their newspapers. Photojournalism hasn't lost its way but it's been conveniently pushed aside. Shrinking editorial budgets, increasing competition and mistrust of the Press are just some of the factors impacting photojournalism. But the power of photography endures and technology is allowing photographers more creative freedom than ever before. The world is hungry for visual storytelling, but will photojournalism survive?

    We spoke to photojournalists working in this industry about the state of affairs today, and asked their opinions about photojournalism in the digital age.

    Ilvy Njiokiktjien

    "Assignments have changed, so people don't need to go somewhere for months to work on one project. When Don McCullin's pictures were making it into the newspaper, his images would be the news. Now if I take a picture at Nelson Mandela's funeral, for instance, there are 300 other photographers there. There are so many images that you are never going to really shoot an iconic image. You're not the only one there—there are your colleagues and there are people with cellphones. I don't think a single image will ever lose its power. Single images, to me, are so strong—I can look at a single image and never forget it. But there are new ways of storytelling—with cellphones, with interactive online experiences and virtual reality. Therefore, it's important to see what matches the story."

    Jérôme Sessini

    "I think now we are freer than before because of technology. Besides, we don't care about the newspapers like people did before. We get free from the newspapers, so we are able to tell stories in the way we want to tell them. In my opinion, pictures can express emotions—I believe more in emotions than in rationality. I don't want to tell people, ‘this is like this', or ‘like that'. I want them to first feel something from the pictures, and then ask some questions. They will have to find the answers by themselves."

    Magnus Wennman

    "When I started, press photography was a pretty old-school profession, but today it's completely different. It's not about the technique any more. It's about telling stories, and you have endless opportunities to tell stories by means of pictures. If you are engaging in storytelling, I would say your future is very bright. Photojournalism is more democratic. As a matter of fact, nowadays we can see people shooting with their cellphones anywhere. Photojournalism is no longer the privilege of those working at newspapers. The new generation of photojournalists should work in a completely different way. As you see everywhere, visual storytelling is getting more and more important. If you're good at that, you're going to survive."

    Daniel Etter

    "A lot of people have been declaring that photojournalism is dead and, somehow, it's still around. It's still alive, and it's still kicking—maybe not quite as hard as in Don McCullin's days, but it's still important. It doesn't have the impact it once had, and it will never have that impact again. I always believe photography plays a role, but if there are better ways of telling visual stories, I'm fine with that. The biggest problem we are running into now is how to make others believe us. Look at how really basic facts are in question nowadays. To make our work a reliable source of information is our biggest challenge. I haven't figured out a way to make news more trustworthy—the only thing we can do is do good work. That means doing research and trying to represent events in a fair way."

    5G, the fifth generation of wireless, promises lightning-fast download speeds and could lay foundation for high-tech advancements like self-driving cars. But like many new technologies, it's causing concern about potential health issues.

    The first generation of wireless introduced mobile phones, and 2G brought texting. 3G laid the groundwork for smart-phones, and 4G allowed video streaming and more. 5G is expected to download data 20 times faster than its predessor(前任)，and some experts argue it could be much faster.

    Too much of a good thing?

    It's not just about streaming data faster, it's about streaming more of it. On a 5G network, a user can download a movie instantly, and data will flow between connected objects without delay. The amount of data people use on mobile devices has gone up 40 times since 2010 and is only expected to increase. 5G networks are wireless companies attempts to satisfy that demand.

    Uncertain effects

    The untested nature of 5G, and the extensiveness of its infrastructure(基础设施)has some worried that  the increased exposure could have serious health effects. Wireless safety advocates(倡议人士)have called for more studies on the effects of the exposure, and one group is trying to stop the installment of 5G networks in Chicago's neighborhoods.

    The federal government has safety rules that wireless companies must obey that limit human exposure to radio waves, including frequencies uses with 5G.

    Wireless industry association CTIA says typical exposure to 5G infrastructure is comparable to Bluetooth devices and baby monitors, and there is no scientific evidence of negative health effects.

    Still, assurances from government agencies and industry operators are not enough for Chicago resident Judy Blake. Additional studies on 5G's health impacts likely wouldn't soothe her either. She said, "People can't choose whether or not to be exposed to this radiation."

    "I don't need another test. The only test that's going to happen now is people's lives," said Blake, 67.

    Only time will tell?

    Though little is known about the long-term health impact of the millimeter waves that 5G operates on, some research has shown short-term exposure could be problematic, said Joel Moskowitz, a public health expert at the University of California at Berkeley.

    The eyes and sweat glands(腺体)are among several body parts studies have shown could be at risk. Moskowitz said. Insects and plant life could also be affected, he added.

    The millimeter waves used in SG are absorbed by the upper layers of skin, potentially causing the temperature of the skin to rise, said Suresh Borkar, senior lecturer in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the Illinois Institute of Technology. The effects of extended rises in skin temperature "become a big unknown," he said.

    This isn't the first time people will come into contact with millimeter waves: They're also used in airport body scanners, said Lav Varshney, assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Still, it's the first time the high- frequency waves will he used on such a scale, and concerns surrounding new technologies are common throughout history.

    "When cars first started replacing horse-drawn carriages, people were afraid of what the health impacts of traveling at high speeds would be," Varshney said. "There has always been occurrence of this fear."

    Many students have trouble sitting quietly. They play with pencils, talk out of turn, and jump to do things before thinking. Others can sit still but find it hard to focus on classwork. They may daydream, struggle to organize their work and forget to do assignments.

    Most people feel restless or unglued from time to time, but some feel this way almost all the time. Nearly one out of ten kids have ADHD ( Attention-Deficit /Hyperactivity Disorder ). But ADHD does not have to be a roadblock to achievement. Here, two professionals in their fields share the secrets of their success.

    Astronaut Scott Kelly has flown on four space tasks, including one that lasted close to a year. But when he was growing up, he had trouble focusing in school. As a result, he earned low grades. 441 read a novel in college about the space program. The book motivated me to study harder and become a much better student and eventually, an astronaut. The lesson I learned was: Don't give up on yourself. Find something or someone that motivates you and use that to help motivate yourself.

    Figure skater Zachary Donohue placed fourth for ice dancing at the 2018 Winter Olympics. In elementary school, Zachary had a hard time making friends because his classmates thought lie was wild, overly excitable and lacking orderly continuity. "A lot of very successful people have ADHD, so wear it with pride. When I was 16, I realized that it was OK for me to be different than others. Now, at 27, I'm learning to understand my own feelings. I still struggle with ADHD, but I've learned that I'm responsible for more than just myself. I've learned how important it is to be organized and to be a step ahead. "

    At the age of 83, I'm reading more and dusting less. I'm sitting in the yard and admiring the view without caring about the weeds in the garden. I'm spending more time with my family and friends and less time working.

    Whenever possible, life should be a pattern of experiences to savor, not to suffer. I'm trying to recognize these moments now and cherish them.

    I'm not "saving" anything; we use our good china and crystal for every special event such as losing a pound, or the first Amaryllis blossom. I wear my good clothes to the market. I'm not saving my good perfume for special parties, but wearing it for clerks in the hardware store and tellers at the bank.

    "Someday" and "one of these days" are losing their positions in my vocabulary. If it's worth seeing or hearing or doing, I want to see and do it now.

I'm not sure what others would have done had they known they wouldn't be here for the tomorrow that we all take for granted. I think they would have called family members and a few close friends. They might have called a few former friends to apologize and mend fences for past quarrels. I like to think they would have gone out for a Chinese dinner or for whatever their favorite food was.

    It's those little things left undone that would make me angry if I knew my hours were limited. Angry because I hadn't written certain letters that I intended to write one of these days. Angry and sorry that I didn't tell my husband and parents often enough how much I truly love them. I'm trying very hard not to put off, hold back, or save anything that would add laughter and luster to our lives. And every morning when I open my eyes, I tell myself that it is special. Every day, every minute, every breath truly is a gift.

JENNIFER SALLS — A high school math teacher in Sparks, Nevada

    It is possible to construct good online courses that would support mathematics learning with middle and high school students. However, these courses would not look like most current online courses.

    When we imagine an online course, we think of a solitary (孤立的) process in which a student is holed up with his or her computer, watching PowerPoints, paging through screens of text and solving a whole bunch of problems. While learning may be occurring, I suspect that it's short-term with little real understanding of mathematics. There are some students who learn well under these circumstances, but this is not true for the majority of students.

    A good online course would take advantage of the many interactive resources. For example, if students were learning to solve equations, they would be directed to solve a carefully arranged set of problems using an interactive program. They would reflect on the interaction and share their observations with others taking the course.

    Eventually, the lesson would move students toward solving equations, using their experiences with the interactive program as the jumping-off point. Students could experience real-world problems through video and simulations and use a variety of computer-based tools to solve these problems. Notice that a course like this is not solitary, but highly interactive, and it builds both problem-solving skills and conceptual knowledge.

BRIGID BARRON — A psychologist at Stanford University's School of Education

    Whether or not any computing tool used in the classroom will interfere with or energize learning depends on how the teacher organizes its use.

    When online courses are well designed, they offer learners and teachers wonderful opportunities. Hybrid models that combine classroom interaction with tools like blogs, podcasts, social networks and discussion forums can engage students in ways that traditional environments do not. When students are given challenging material, asked to carry out research and to create ways to share what they are learning with students from all over the world, engagement goes up.

    There are other benefits. Assessment of student learning can be partly automated and designed to provide continuous feedback. When students need assistance, they can be directed to activities that will help them learn. Perhaps most importantly, online courses can help bridge gaps in course offerings within a school district. Many economically challenged schools don't have the resources to provide specialized or advanced courses, but those courses could be offered online.

    Many students are already using technology in their own time to learn and create, for their own purposes or for school assignments (作业).If they know where to look, they can access online communities that foster their imagination and offer informal mentorship.

    Instead of wondering whether teenagers are too easily distracted by computers, we should be figuring out how we can use digital media to sustain teenagers' interest and their desire to learn.

    Scientists often complain that people are not rational (理性的) in their opposition to technologies such as nuclear power and genetically modified (GM) crops. From a statistical perspective, these are very safe, and so people's fear can be explained only by emotion, strengthened by ignorance. Electricity from nuclear power has led to far fewer direct deaths than has coalfired power, yet many people are afraid of it, and hardly anyone is afraid of coal plants. Similar arguments can be made about GM crops, which studies have shown are generally safe for most people to eat.

    Scientific illiteracy (无知) may be part of the problem. Most of us are afraid of things we don't understand, and studies have shown that scientists tend to be more accepting of potentially risky technologies than laypeople. This suggests that when people know a lot about such technologies, they are usually reassured.

    But there's more to the issue than meets the eye. It is true that many of us fear the unknown, but it is also true that we don't care enough about routine risks. Part of the explanation is complacency: we tend not to fear the familiar, and thus familiarity can lead us to underestimate risk. The investigation into the Deepwater Horizon blowout and oil spill (原油泄漏) in 2010 showed that complacency—among executives, among engineers and among government officials—was a major cause of that disaster. So the fact that experts are unworried about a threat is not necessarily reassuring.

    Scientists also make a mistake when they assume that public concerns are wholly or even mostly about safety. Some people object to GM crops because these crops facilitate the increased use of chemicals. Others have a problem with the social impacts that switching to GM organisms can have on traditional farming communities or with the political implications of leaving a large share of the food supply in the hands of a few corporations.

    Geoengineering (地球工程学) to lessen the impacts of climate change is another example. Laypeople as well as scientists are more concerned about oversight (监管) than safety. Who will decide whether this is a good way to deal with climate change? If we undertake the project of setting the global temperature by controlling how much sunlight reaches Earth's surface, who will be included in that "we" and by what process will the "right" global temperature be chosen?

Can we say which group's view is closer to an accurate assessment?

    Walls blanketed in moss (苔鲜) are popping up in major cities, along with promises that they can reduce air pollution 一 but can a few square metres of plant matter really deal with the smog?

    A Berlin-based firm, Green City Solutions, believes so.  Its moss walls, called the CityTree, are roughly 4 square metres in size. Armed with Wi-Fi sensors to monitor the health of moss, a City Tree functions autonomously and requires very little maintenance(维护) . The wall collects rainwater, which is pumped through a built-in irrigation system to the plants, powered by solar energy. As a result, the fi 皿 says each CityTree is able to "eat" around 250 grams of particulate (颗粒) matter a day   (nearly 90 kgs a year) and removes about 240 metric tons of CO2 annually. It also cools the surrounding air.

    Aware that getting the surrounding air in contact  with  the moss  wall is crucial  for  the CityTree to be effective, the inventors ensure that the location of each installation  (安装)  is chosen carefully s pots where pollution is heavy due  to  traffic  and  where  air flow  is  limited  are  picked. The importance of this step is explained by the fact that the waste gas from a car generally goes vertically a few kilometres into the air.

    But this doesn't mean moss walls will necessarily protect people from pollution. In the Netherlands, researchers found that eight walls installed in Amsterdam failed to reduce the concentration of particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen dioxide  (N02). Their report concluded that even doubling the number of moss walls would do little to improve their effectiveness.

    The CityTree is not meant for parks or to substitute for street trees, but to add greenery to concrete-heavy spaces where planting is not an option. It's important to remember that street trees provide a whole host of other benefits, including shelter and habitat for urban wildlife, shade and cooling for people on the street, and reduction of urban heat islands.

    The Democratic debate on health care has to date centred around who should be covered and who should pay the bill. That debate, which has been going on for decades, has no clear answers and cannot be easily resolved because of two fundamental realities: Health care is expensive, and Americans are sick.

    Instead of debating who should pay for all these, no one is asking the far more simple and imperative question: What is making us so sick, and how can we reverse this so we need less health care? The answer is staring us in the face, on average three times a day: our food.

    Poor diet is the leading cause of mortality in the United States, causing more than half a million deaths per year. Just 10 dietary factors are estimated to cause nearly 1,000 deaths every day from heart disease(心血管疾病), stroke and diabetes alone. These conditions are dizzyingly expensive. Cardiovascular disease costs $351 billion annually in health care spending and lost productivity, while diabetes costs $327 billion annually. The total economic cost of obesity is estimated at $1.72 trillion per year, or 9.3 per cent of gross domestic product.

    Fortunately, advances in nutrition science and policy now provide a road map for addressing this national nutrition crisis. The "Food Is Medicine" solutions are win－win, promoting better well－being, lower health care costs, greater sustainability, reduced disparities among population groups, improved economic competitiveness and greater national security.

    Some simple, measurable improvements can be made in several health and related areas. For example, Medicare, Medicaid, private insurers and hospitals should include nutrition in any electronic health record; update medical training, licensing and continuing education guidelines to put an emphasis on nutrition; offer patient prescription programmes for healthy produce; and, for the sickest patients, cover home－delivered, medically－tailored meals. Just the last action, for example, can save a net $9，000 in health care costs per patient per year.

    Taxes on sugary beverages and junk food can be paired with subsidies on protective foods like fruits, nuts, vegetables, beans, plant oils, whole grains, yogurt and fish. Emphasizing protective foods represents an important positive message for the public and food industry that celebrates and rewards good nutrition. Levels of harmful additives like sodium, added sugar and trans fat can be lowered through voluntary industry targets or regulatory safety standards.

    The private sector can also play a key role. Changes in shareholder criteria and new investor coalitions should financially reward companies for tackling obesity, diabetes and other diet－related illness. Public－private partnerships should emphasize research and development on best agricultural and food－processing practices. All work sites should demand healthy food when negotiating with cafeteria vendors and include incentives for healthy eating in their wellness benefits.

    Government plays a crucial role. The significant impacts of the food system on well－being, health care spending, the economy and the environment—together with mounting public and industry awareness of these issues—have created an opportunity for government leaders to champion real solutions.

    Yet with rare exceptions, the current presidential candidates are not being asked about these critical national issues. Every candidate should have a food platform, and every debate should explore these positions. A new emphasis on the problems and promise of nutrition to improve health and lower health care costs is long overdue for the presidential primary debates and should be prominent in the 2020 general election and the next administration.

    A growing number of American states are requiring schools to teach students "media literacy" skills. California is the latest state to pass such a requirement. Media literacy, also known as news literacy, is the ability to use critical thinking skills to recognize differences between real and "fake" news.

    The new law requires California's Department of Education to provide materials related to media literacy on its website. Its goal is to give students a set of effective tools to "enable them to make informed decisions".

    The media literacy efforts were based on a Stanford University study from 2016. It found that 80 percent of U.S. middle school students failed to recognize an advertisement that looked like a real news story. The researchers also found that high school students had trouble telling the difference between a real and a fake news website.

    The study called for more efforts to help students recognize false information on the internet. It said that young people also need the skills to find out where news stories come from, and to be able to judge the trustworthiness of sources and writers.

    Carolyn Edy is a professor of communication at Appalachian State University in North Carolina. She said she has seen a clear change in her students' abilities to judge news sources. Edy said that when students used to read printed newspapers, it was easier for them to recognize fact from opinion. Now, it's necessary to teach students how to fully examine websites.

    One of Edy's goals is to teach students how to research the news organizations responsible for the stories they are reading. One way to do this is for students to ask a series of questions. One example is, "What is the overall mission of the organization?"

    Edy said young people also need to judge whether news organizations identify any possible conflicts of interest. Another question to ask is, "What do they do when they get a story wrong?" Responsible and trustworthy news organizations issue corrections if something is falsely reported, she said.

    Edy added that one good thing to come out of the rise of misinformation and fake news is that it has made many people seek out good reporting.

    The conclusion of the Paris Agreement in 2015, in which almost every nation was committed to reducing their carbon emissions, was supposed to be a turning point in the fight against climate change. But many countries have already fallen behind their goals. Meanwhile emissions worldwide continue to rise.

    The only way to catch up is to aggressively pursue an approach that takes advantage of every possible strategy to reduce emissions. Wind and solar energy are usually part of this effort, but it must also include investing heavily in carbon capture, utilization(应用)and storage(CCUS)—a range of technologies that pull carbon dioxide from the air, and transform it into useful materials or store it underground. Although CCUS has been opposed as too expensive and unproved, recent gains have made it far more effective. Improvements such as chemical compounds could drive the cost down from $100 per ton of captured carbon in 2016 to $ 20 per ton by 2025, according to a 2016 article in Science.

    Three primary CCUS paths lead to the reduction of carbon emissions: retrofitting(改装)existing power plants; reducing emissions in industries that cannot run on renewable energy; and directly removing carbon from the air. Cutting emissions from existing electric power stations with CCUS could be made more appealing in a future with a circular carbon economy, in which captured carbon could be resold and recycled for other uses—for instance, serving as a raw material for making concrete or plastics.

    The basic idea of carbon capture has faced a lot of opposition. Skepticism has come from climate change deniers, who see it as a waste of money, and from passionate supporters of climate action, who fear that it would be used to justify continued reliance on fossil fuels. Both groups are ignoring the recent advances and the opportunity they present. By limiting investment in decarbonization, the world will miss a major avenue for reducing emissions in a variety of industries. CCUS can also create jobs and profits from what was previously only a waste material by creating a larger economy around carbon.

    The transition to clean energy has become necessary. But that transition's ability to achieve deep decarbonization will become less effective without this wide range of solutions, which must include CCUS.

    A decade ago, at the end of my first semester teaching at Wharton, a student stopped by for office hours. He sat down and burst into tears. My mind started cycling through a list of events that could make a college junior cry: His girlfriend had left him; he had been accused of plagiarism(剽窃). "I just got my first A-minus, "he said, his voice shaking.

    Year after year, I watch in dismay(郁网) as students go all for straight A's. Some sacrifice their health; a few have even tried to sue(控告)their school after falling short. All hold the belief that top marks are a ticket to best graduate schools and high-paying job offers.

    I was one of them. I started college with the goal of graduating with a 4. 0. It would be a reflection of my brainpower and willpower, revealing that I had the right stuff to succeed. But I was wrong.

    The evidence is clear: Academic excellence is not a strong predictor of career excellence. Across industries, research shows that the connection between grades and job performance is modest in the first year after college and unimportant within a handful of years. For example, at Google, once employees are two or three years out of college, their grades have no bearing on their performance. (Of course, it must be said that if you got D's, you probably didn't end up at Google.)

    In a classic 1962 study, a team of psychologists tracked down America's most creative architects and compared them with their technically skilled but less original matches. One of the factors that distinguished the creative architects was a record of grades. "In college our creative architects earned about a B average, "Donald MacKinnon wrote. "In work and courses which caught their interest they could turn in an A performance, but in courses that failed to strike their imagination, they were quite willing to do no work at all. "

    This might explain why Steve Jobs finished high school with a 2. 65 G. P. A. , J. K. Rowling graduated from the University of Exeter with roughly a C average, and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. got only one A in his four years at Morehouse.